Informatik
Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (20)
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (22)
Has full text
- yes (22)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (22)
Institute
- Informatik (22)
Publisher
- IEEE (22) (remove)
Large critical systems, such as those created in the space domain, are usually developed by a large number of organizations and, furthermore, they have to comply with standards. Yet, the different stakeholders often do not have a common understanding of the needed quality of requirements specifications. Achieving such a common understanding is a laborious process that is currently not sufficiently supported. Moreover, such a common understanding must be aligned with the standards. In this paper, we present an approach that can be used to align the different stakeholder perceptions regarding the quality of requirements specifications. Existing quality models for requirements specifications are analyzed for equivalences, and transferred into a common representation, the so-called Aligned Quality Map (AQM). Furthermore, a process is defined that supports the alignment of different stakeholder perspectives with regard to the quality of requirements specifications using AQM, which is validated in a case study in the context of European space projects. AQM has been created and populated with an initial set of quality models. It is designed in such way that it can be extended to include further quality models. The case study has shown that an alignment of different stakeholder perspectives and the quality model of the European Cooperation for Space Standardization using AQM is feasible. The approach allows for aligning different stakeholder perspectives for a common understanding of the quality of requirements specifications in the context of standards. Furthermore, AQM supports the assessment of requirements specifications.
Providing a digital infrastructure, platform technologies foster interfirm collaboration between loosely coupled companies, enabling the formation of ecosystems and building the organizational structure for value co-creation. Despite the known potential, the development of platform ecosystems creates new sources of complexity and uncertainty due to the involvement of various independent actors. For a platform ecosystem to succeed, it is essential that the platform ecosystem participants are aligned, coordinated, and given a common direction. Traditionally, product roadmaps have served these purposes during product development. A systematic mapping study was conducted to better understand how product roadmapping could be used in the dynamic environment of platform ecosystems. One result of the study is that there are hardly any concrete approaches for product roadmapping in platform ecosystems so far. However, many challenges on the topic are described in the literature from different perspectives. Based on the results of the systematic mapping study, a research agenda for product roadmapping in platform ecosystems is derived and presented.
Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders' collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by their creator(s), software processes in practice mutate into hybrids over time. Are these still agile In this article, we investigate the question: what makes a software development method agile We present an empirical study grounded in a large-scale international survey that aims to identify software development methods and practices that improve or tame agility. Based on 556 data points, we analyze the perceived degree of agility in the implementation of standard project disciplines and its relation to used development methods and practices. Our findings suggest that only a small number of participants operate their projects in a purely traditional or agile manner (under 15%). That said, most project disciplines and most practices show a clear trend towards increasing degrees of agility. Compared to the methods used to develop software, the selection of practices has a stronger effect on the degree of agility of a given discipline. Finally, there are no methods or practices that explicitly guarantee or prevent agility. We conclude that agility cannot be defined solely at the process level. Additional factors need to be taken into account when trying to implement or improve agility in a software company. Finally, we discuss the field of software process-related research in the light of our findings and present a roadmap for future research.
Context: The manufacturing industry is facing a transformation with regard to Industry 4.0 (I4). A transformation towards full automation of production including a multitude of innovations is necessary. Startups and entrepreneurial processes can support such a transformation as has been shown in other industries. However, I4 has some specifics, so it is unclear how entrepreneurship can be adapted in I4. Understanding these specifics is important to develop suitable training programs for I4 startups and to accelerate the transformation.
Objective: This study identifies and outlines the essential characteristics and constraints of entrepreneurial processes in I4.
Method: 14 semi-structured interviews were conducted with experts in the field of I4 entrepreneurship. The interviews were analysed and categorized by qualitative analyses.
Results: The interviews revealed several characteristics of I4 that have a significant impact on the various phases of the entrepreneurial process. Examples of such specifics include the difficult access to customers, the necessary deep understanding of the customer and the domain, the difficulty of testing risky assumptions, and the complex development and productization of solutions. The complexity of hardware and software components, cost structures, and necessary customer-specific customizations affect the scalability of I4 startups. These essential characteristics also require specialised skills and resources from I4 startups.
Context: The software-intensive business is characterized by increasing market dynamics, rapid technological changes, and fast-changing customer behaviors. Organizations face the challenge of moving away from traditional roadmap formats to an outcome-oriented approach that focuses on delivering value to the customer and the business. An important starting point and a prerequisite for creating such outcome-oriented roadmaps is the development of a product vision to which internal and external stakeholders can be aligned. However, the process of creating a product vision is little researched and understood.
Objective: The goal of this paper is to identify lessons-learned from product vision workshops, which were conducted to develop outcome-oriented product roadmaps.
Method: We conducted a multiple-case study consisting of two different product vision workshops in two different corporate contexts.
Results: Our results show that conducting product vision workshops helps to create a common understanding among all stakeholders about the future direction of the products. In addition, we identified key organizational aspects that contribute to the success of product vision workshops, including the participation of employees from functionally different departments.
Product roadmaps in the new mobility domain: state of the practice and industrial experiences
(2021)
Context: The New Mobility industry is a young market that includes high market dynamics and is therefore associated with a high degree of uncertainty. Traditional product roadmapping approaches such a detailed planning of features over a long-time horizon typically fail in such environments. For this reason, companies that are active in the field of New Mobility are faced with the challenge of keeping their product roadmaps reliable for stakeholders while at the same time being able to react flexibly to changing market requirements.
Objective: The goal of this paper is to identify the state of practice regarding product roadmapping of New Mobility companies. In addition, the related challenges within the product roadmapping process as well as the success factors to overcome these challenges will be highlighted.
Method: We conducted semi-structured expert interviews with 8 experts (7 German company and one Finnish company) from the field of New Mobility and performed a content analysis.
Results: Overall the results of the study showed that the participating companies are aware of the requirements that the New Mobility sector entails. Therefore, they exhibit a high level of maturity in terms of product roadmapping. Nevertheless, some aspects were revealed that pose specific challenges for the participating companies. One major challenge, for example, is that New Mobility in terms of public clients is often a tender business with non-negotiable product requirements. Thus, the product roadmap can be significantly influenced from the outside. As factors for a successful product roadmapping mainly soft factors such as trust between all people involved in the product development process and transparency throughout the entire roadmapping process were mentioned.
How to prioritize your product roadmap when everything feels important: a grey literature review
(2021)
Context: A key factor in achieving product success is to identify what and in which order outputs must be launched in order to deliver the most value to the customer and the business. Therefore, a well-established process to discover and prioritize the content of the product roadmap in the right way is crucial for the success of a company. However, most companies prioritize their product roadmap items based on opinions of experts or the management. Additionally, increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and fast changing customer behavior complicate the conduction of the prioritization process. Therefore, many companies are struggling to finding and establishing suitable techniques for prioritizing their product roadmap.
Objective: In order to gain a better understanding of the prioritization process in a dynamic and uncertain market environment, this paper aims to identify suitable techniques for the prioritization in such environments.
Method: We conducted a Grey Literature Review according to the guidelines of Garousi et al.
Results: 18 techniques for the prioritization of the product roadmap could be identified. 15 techniques are primarily used to prioritize outputs by considering factors such as the expected impact or effort. Two technique are most suitable for prioritizing risky assumptions that need to be validated and one technique focuses on the prioritization of outcomes. All techniques have in common that they should be conducted as cross-functional team activity in order to include different perspectives in the prioritization process.
Nowadays companies are facing increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations. Together with the adoption of lean and agile practices this situation makes it increasingly difficult to plan and predict upfront which products, services or features should be developed in the future. Consequently, many organizations are struggling with their ability to provide reliable and stable product roadmaps by applying traditional approaches. This paper aims at identifying and getting a better understanding of which measures companies have taken to transform their current product roadmapping practices to the requirements of a dynamic and uncertain market environment. This also includes challenges and success factors within this transformation process as well as measures that companies have planned for the future. We conducted 18 semi-structured expert interviews with practitioners of different companies and performed a thematic data analysis. The study shows that the participating companies are aware that the transformation of traditional product roadmapping practices to fulfill the requirements of a dynamic and uncertain market environment is necessary. The most important measures that the participating companies have taken are 1) adequate item planning concerning the timeline, 2) the replacement of a fixed time-based chart by a more flexible structure, 3) the use of outcomes to determine the items (such as features) on the a roadmap, 4) the creation of a central roadmap which allows deriving different representation for each stakeholder and department.
In recent years companies have faced challenges by high market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations. Together with the adaption of lean and agile practices, it is increasingly difficult to predict upfront which products, features or services will satisfy the needs of the customers and the organization. Currently, many new products fail to produce a significant financial return. One reason is that companies are not doing enough product discovery activities. Product discovery aims at tackling the various risks before the implementation of a product starts. The academic literature only provides little guidance for conducting product discovery in practice. Objective: In order to gain a better understanding of product discovery activities in practice, this paper aims at identifying motivations, approaches, challenges, risks, and pitfalls of product discovery reported in the grey literature. Method: We performed a grey literature review (GLR) according to the guidelines to Garousi et al. Results: The study shows that the main motivation for conducting product discovery activities is to reduce the uncertainty to a level that makes it possible to start building a solution that provides value for the customers and the business. Several product discovery approaches are reported in the grey literature which include different phases such as alignment, problem exploration, ideation, and validation. Main challenges are, among others, the lack of clarity of the problem to be solved, the prescription of concrete solutions through management or experts, and the lack of cross-functional collaboration.
Product roadmaps are an important tool in product development. They provide direction, enable consistent development in relation to a product vision and support communication with relevant stakeholders. There are many different formats for product roadmaps, but they are often based on the assumption that the future is highly predictable. However, especially software-intensive businesses are faced with increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and changing user expectations. As a result, many organizations are wondering what roadmap format is appropriate for them and what components it should have to deal with an unpredictable future. Objectives: To gain a better understanding of the formats of product roadmaps and their components, this paper aims to identify suitable formats for the development and handling of product roadmaps in dynamic and uncertain markets. Method: We performed a grey literature review (GLR) according to the guidelines from Garousi. Results: A Google search identified 426 articles, 25 of which were included in this study. First, various components of the roadmap were identified, especially the product vision, themes, goals, outcomes and outputs. In addition, various product roadmap formats were discovered, such as feature-based, goal-oriented, outcome-driven and a theme-based roadmap. The roadmap components were then assigned to the various product roadmap formats. This overview aims at providing initial decision support for companies to select a suitable product roadmap format and adapt it to their own needs.