Informatik
Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (68)
- Journal article (21)
- Book chapter (2)
- Report (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (93) (remove)
Institute
- Informatik (93)
Publisher
- Springer (26)
- IEEE (22)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V (11)
- Association for Computing Machinery (8)
- Elsevier (7)
- PeerJ Inc. (2)
- RWTH Aachen (2)
- The Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. (2)
- Wiley (2)
- Association for Computing Machinery ACM (1)
In the era of digital transformation, the notion of software quality transcends its traditional boundaries, necessitating an expansion to encompass the realms of value creation for customers and the business. Merely optimizing technical aspects of software quality can result in diminishing returns. Product discovery techniques can be seen as a powerful mechanism for crafting products that align with an expanded concept of quality - one that incorporates value creation. Previous research has shown that companies struggle to determine appropriate product discovery techniques for generating, validating, and prioritizing ideas for new products or features to ensure they meet the needs and desires of the customers and the business. For this reason, we conducted a grey literature review to identify various techniques for product discovery. First, the article provides an overview of different techniques and assesses how frequently they are mentioned in the literature review. Second, we mapped these techniques to an existing product discovery process from previous research to provide concrete guidelines for establishing product discovery in their organizations. The analysis shows, among other things, the increasing importance of techniques to structure the problem exploration process and the product strategy process. The results are interpreted regarding the importance of the techniques to practical applications and recognizable trends.
Context
In a world of high dynamics and uncertainties, it is almost impossible to have a long-term prediction of which products, services, or features will satisfy the needs of the customer. To counter this situation, the conduction of Continuous Improvement or Design Thinking for product discovery are common approaches. A major constraint in conducting product discovery activities is the high effort to discover and validate features and requirements. In addition, companies struggle to integrate product discovery activities into their agile processes and iterations.
Objective
This paper aims at suggests 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 on Design Thinking activities. To operationalize DEW, proposals for practitioners are presented that can be used to integrate product discovery into product development and delivery.
Method
A case study was conducted for the development of the DEW index. In addition, we conducted an expert workshop to develop proposals for the integration of product discovery activities into the product development and delivery process.
Results
First, we present the "Discovery Effort Worthiness Index" in form of a formula. Second, we identified requirements that must be fulfilled for systematic integration of product discovery activities into product development and delivery. Third, we derived from the requirements proposals for the integration of product discovery activities with a company's product development and delivery.
Conclusion
The developed "Discovery Effort Worthiness Index" provides a tool for companies and their product owners to determine how much effort they should spend on Design Thinking methods to discover and validate requirements. Integrating product discovery with product development and delivery should ensure that the results of product discovery are incorporated into product development. This aims to systematically analyze product risks to increase the chance of product success.
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.
Context: Companies that operate in the software-intensive business are confronted with high market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies as well as fast-changing customer behavior. Traditional product roadmapping practices, such as fixed-time-based charts including detailed planned features, products, or services typically fail in such environments. Until now, the underlying reasons for the failure of product roadmaps in a dynamic and uncertain market environment are not widely analyzed and understood.
Objective: This paper aims to identify current challenges and pitfalls practitioners face when developing and handling product roadmaps in a dynamic and uncertain market environment.
Method: To reach our objective we conducted a grey literature review (GLR).
Results: Overall, we identified 40 relevant papers, from which we could extract 11 challenges of the application of product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. The analysis of the articles showed that the major challenges for practitioners originate from overcoming a feature-driven mindset, not including a lot of details in the product roadmap, and ensuring that the content of the roadmap is not driven by management or expert opinion.
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.
Context: Nowadays the market environment is characterized by high uncertainties due to high market dynamics, confronting companies with new challenges in creating and updating product roadmaps. Most companies are still using traditional approaches which typically fail in such environments. Therefore, companies are seeking opportunities for new product roadmapping approaches.
Objective: This paper presents good practices to support companies better understand what factors are required to conduct a successful product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment.
Method: Based on a grey literature review, essential aspects for conducting product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment were identified. Expert workshops were then held with two researchers and three practitioners to develop best practices and the proposed approach for an outcome-driven roadmap. These results were then given to another set of practitioners and their perceptions were gathered through interviews.
Results: The study results in the development of 9 good practices that provide practitioners with insights into what aspects are crucial for product roadmapping in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. Moreover, we propose an approach to product roadmapping that includes providing a flexible structure and focusing on delivering value to the customer and the business. To ensure the latter, this approach consists of the main items outcome hypothesis, validated outcomes, and discovered outputs.
Today, companies face increasing market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies, and rapid changes in customer behavior. Traditional approaches to product development typically fail in such environments and require companies to transform their often feature-driven mindset into a product-led mindset. A promising first step on the way to a product-led company is a better understanding of how product planning can be adapted to the requirements of an increasingly dynamic and uncertain market environment in the sense of product roadmapping. The authors developed the DEEP product roadmap assessment tool to help companies evaluate their current product roadmap practices and identify appropriate actions to transition to a more product-led company. Objective: The goal of this paper is to gain insight into the applicability and usefulness of version 1.1 of the DEEP model. In addition, the benefits, and implications of using the DEEP model in corporate contexts will be explored. Method: We conducted a multiple case study in which participants were observed using the DEEP model. We then interviewed each participant to understand their perceptions of the DEEP model. In addition, we conducted interviews with each company's product management department to learn how the application of the DEEP model influenced their attitudes toward product roadmapping. Results: The study showed that by applying the DEEP model, participants better understood which artifacts and methods were critical to product roadmapping success in a dynamic and uncertain market environment. In addition, the application of the DEEP model helped convince management and other stakeholders of the need to change current product roadmapping practices. The application also proved to be a suitable starting point for the transformation in the participating companies.
Turning students into Industry 4.0 entrepreneurs: design and evaluation of a tailored study program
(2022)
Startups in the field of Industry 4.0 could be a huge driver of innovation for many industry sectors such as manufacturing. However, there is a lack of education programs to ensure a sufficient number of well-trained founders and thus a supply of such startups. Therefore, this study presents the design, implementation, and evaluation of a university course tailored to the characteristics of Industry 4.0 entrepreneurship. Educational design-based research was applied with a focus on content and teaching concept. The study program was first implemented in 2021 at a German university of applied sciences with 25 students, of which 22 participated in the evaluation. The evaluation of the study program was conducted with a pretest–posttest-design targeting three areas: (1) knowledge about the application domain, (2) entrepreneurial intention and (3) psychological characteristics. The entrepreneurial intention was measured based on the theory of planned behavior. For measuring psychological characteristics, personality traits associated with entrepreneurship were used. Considering the study context and the limited external validity of the study, the following can be identified in particular: The results show that a university course can improve participants' knowledge of this particular area. In addition, perceived behavioral control of starting an Industry 4.0 startup was enhanced. However, the results showed no significant effects on psychological characteristics.
Startups play a key role in software-based innovation. They make an important contribution to an economy’s ability to compete and innovate, and their importance will continue to grow due to increasing digitalization. However, the success of a startup depends primarily on market needs and the ability to develop a solution that is attractive enough for customers to choose. A sophisticated technical solution is usually not critical, especially in the early stages of a startup. It is not necessary to be an experienced software engineer to start a software startup. However, this can become problematic as the solution matures and software complexity increases. Based on a proposed solution for systematic software development for early-stage startups, in this paper, we present the key findings of a survey study to identify the methodological and technical priorities of software startups. Among other things, we found that requirements engineering and architecture pose challenges for startups. In addition, we found evidence that startups’ software development approaches do not tend to change over time. An early investment in a more scalable development approach could help avoid long-term software problems. To support such an investment, we propose an extended model for Entrepreneurial Software Engineering that provides a foundation for future research.
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: 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.
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.
Context: Many companies are facing an increasingly dynamic and uncertain market environment, making traditional product roadmapping practices no longer sufficiently applicable. As a result, many companies need to adapt their product roadmapping practices for continuing to operate successfully in today’s dynamic market environment. However, transforming product roadmapping practices is a difficult process for organizations. Existing literature offers little help on how to accomplish such a process.
Objective: The objective of this paper is to present a product roadmap transformation approach for organizations to help them identify appropriate improvement actions for their roadmapping practices using an analysis of their current practices.
Method: Based on an existing assessment procedure for evaluating product roadmapping practices, the first version of a product roadmap transformation approach was developed in workshops with company experts. The approach was then given to eleven practitioners and their perceptions of the approach were gathered through interviews.
Results: The result of the study is a transformation approach consisting of a process describing what steps are necessary to adapt the currently applied product roadmapping practice to a dynamic and uncertain market environment. It also includes recommendations on how to select areas for improvement and two empirically based mapping tables. The interviews with the practitioners revealed that the product roadmap transformation approach was perceived as comprehensible, useful, and applicable. Nevertheless, we identified potential for improvements, such as a clearer presentation of some processes and the need for more improvement options in the mapping tables. In addition, minor usability issues were identified.
Entrepreneurial software engineering: towards a hybrid development method for early-stage startups
(2021)
A considerable share of innovative software-intensive products is developed by startups. However, product development in an early-stage startup is not a sequential process. A business idea is usually based on a number of assumptions. The riskiest assumptions need to be tested. Depending on the test results, a product strategy may change several times. This raises the question of how to create sufficiently stable software using engineering principles despite a dynamic product strategy that is subject to many uncertainties. Hybrid development methods that combine agile aspects with classical engineering methods seem to be a good choice in such a start-up context. This paper proposes a lightweight hybrid development method that provides early-stage startups with a framework to support the development of single-feature minimum viable products. The method was derived from a start-up company's founding case and evaluated in expert interviews. The proposed method is intended to provide a basis for discussion between practitioners and scientists with the aim of better understanding the application of software engineering principles in software start-ups.
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.
Context: Nowadays, companies are challenged by increasing market dynamics, rapid changes and disruptive participants entering the market. To survive in such an environment, companies must be able to quickly discover product ideas that meet the needs of both customers and the company and deliver these products to customers. Dual-track agile is a new type of agile development that combines product discovery and delivery activities in parallel, iterative, and cyclical ways. At present, many companies have difficulties in finding and establishing suitable approaches for implementing dual-track agile in their business context.
Objective: In order to gain a better understanding of how product discovery and product delivery can interact with each other and how this interaction can be implemented in practice, this paper aims to identify suitable approaches to dual-track agile.
Method: We conducted a grey literature review (GLR) according to the guidelines to Garousi et al.
Results: Several approaches that support the integration of product discovery with product delivery were identified. This paper presents a selection of these approaches, i.e., the Discovery-Delivery Cycle model, Now-Next-Later Product Roadmaps, Lean Sprints, Product Kata, and Dual-Track Scrum. The approaches differ in their granularity but are similar in their underlying rationales. All approaches aim to ensure that only validated ideas turn into products and thus promise to lead to products that are better received by their users.
It is essential for the success of a company to set a strategic direction in which a product offering will be developed over time to achieve the company vision. For this reason, roadmaps are used in practice. in general, roadmaps can be expressed in various forms such as technology roadmaps, product roadmaps or industry roadmaps. From the point of view of industry, the basic purpose of a roadmap is to explore, visualize and communicate the dynamic linkage between markets, products and technology.
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.