Ja
Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (16) (remove)
Language
- English (16)
Has full text
- yes (16)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (16)
Institute
- Informatik (16)
Publisher
- Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V (10)
- RWTH Aachen (2)
- Springer (2)
- IARIA (1)
Software engineering education is supposed to provide students with industry-relevant knowledge and skills. Educators must address issues beyond exercises and theories that can be directly rehearsed in small settings. A way to experience such effects and to increase the relevance of software engineering education is to apply empirical studies in teaching. In our article, we show how different types of empirical studies can be used for educational purposes in software engineering. We give examples illustrating how to utilize empirical studies, discuss challenges, and derive an initial guideline that supports teachers to include empirical studies in software engineering courses.
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.
The need for creating digitally enhanced products, services, and experiences as well as the emergence of new or modified business models has a significant impact on the automotive domain. Innovative solutions and new topics such as Smart Mobility or Connectivity require current automotive development processes to undergo major changes. They need to be redesigned in a way that it is possible to learn and adapt continuously at a fast pace. Agile methods are promising approaches to address these new challenges. However, agile methods are not tailored to the specific characteristics of the automotive domain such as software product line (SPLs) development. Although, there have been efforts to apply agile methods in the automotive domain, widespread adoptions have not yet taken place.
The ability to develop and deploy high-quality software at a high speed gets increasing relevance for the comptetitiveness of car manufacturers. Agile practices have shown benefits such as faster time to market in several application domains. Therefore, it seems to be promising to carefully adopt agile practices also in the automotive domain. This article presents findings from an interview-based qualitative survey. It aims at understanding perceived forces that support agile adoption. Particularly, it focuses on embedded software development for electronic control units in the automotive domain.
Software and system development faces numerous challenges of rapidly changing markets. To address such challenges, companies and projects design and adopt specific development approaches by combining well-structured methods and flexible agile practices. Yet, the number of methods and practices is large and the actual process composition is often carried out in an ad-hoc manner. This paper reports on a survey on hybrid software development approaches. We study which approaches are used in practice, how different approaches are combined, and what contextual factors influence the use and combination of hybrid software development approaches.
Software process improvement (SPI) is 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 emerging approaches? What are open issues? Still, we struggle to answer the question for what is the current state of SPI and related research? We present initial results from a systematic mapping study to shed light on the field of SPI and to draw conclusions for future research directions. An analysis of 635 publications draws a big picture of SPI-related research of the past 25 years. Our study shows a high number of solution proposals, experience reports, and secondary studies, but only few theories. In particular, standard SPI models are analyzed and evaluated for applicability, especially from the perspective of SPI in small-to-medium-sized companies, which leads to new specialized frameworks. Furthermore, we find a growing interest in success factors to aid companies in conducting SPI.
This summary refers to the paper Software process improvement : where is the evidence? [Ku15].
This paper was published as full research paper in the ICSSP’2015 proceedings.
A software process is the game plan to organize project teams and run projects. Yet, it still is a challenge to select the appropriate development approach for the respective context. A multitude of development approaches compete for the users’ favor, but there is no silver bullet serving all possible setups. Moreover, recent research as well as experience from practice shows companies utilizing different development approaches to assemble the best-fitting approach for the respective company: a more traditional process provides the basic framework to serve the organization, while project teams embody this framework with more agile (and/or lean) practices to keep their flexibility. The paper at hand provides insights into the HELENA study with which we aim to investigate the use of “Hybrid dEveLopmENt Approaches in software systems development”. We present the survey design and initial findings from the survey’s test runs. Furthermore, we outline the next steps towards the full survey.
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 (1) to identify and characterize the set of publications that connect elements of agility to SPI, (2) to explore to which extent agile methods/practices have been used in the context of SPI, and (3) 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.
Managers recognize that software development project teams need to be developed and guided. Although technical skills are necessary, non-technical (NT) skills are equally, if not more, necessary for project success. Currently, there are no proven tools to measure the NT skills of software developers or software development teams. Behavioral markers (observable behaviors that have positive or negative impacts on individual or team performance) are beginning to be successfully used by airline and medical industries to measure NT skill performance. The purpose of this research is to develop and validate the behavior marker system tool that can be used by different managers or coaches to measure the NT skills of software development individuals and teams. This paper presents an empirical study conducted at the Software Factory where users of the behavior marker tool rated video clips of software development teams. The initial results show that the behavior marker tool can be reliably used with minimal training.
Context: Agile practices as well as UX methods are nowadays well-known and often adopted to develop complex software and products more efficiently and effectively. However, in the so called VUCA environment, which many companies are confronted with, the sole use of UX research is not sufficient to find the best solutions for customers. The implementation of Design Thinking can support this process. But many companies and their product owners don’t know how much resources they should spend for conducting Design Thinking.
Objective: This paper aims at suggesting a supportive tool, the “Discovery Effort Worthiness (DEW) Index”, for product owners and agile teams to determine a suitable amount of effort that should be spent for Design Thinking activities.
Method: A case study was conducted for the development of the DEW index. Design Thinking was introduced into the regular development cycle of an industry Scrum team. With the support of UX and Design Thinking experts, a formula was developed to determine the appropriate effort for Design Thinking.
Results: The developed “Discovery Effort Worthiness Index” provides an easy-to-use tool for companies and their product owners to determine how much effort they should spend on Design Thinking methods to discover and validate requirements. A company can map the corresponding Design Thinking methods to the results of the DEW Index calculation, and product owners can select the appropriate measures from this mapping. Therefore, they can optimize the effort spent for discovery and validation.