What do we know about successful software project factors

This dissertation discusses how different practitioners define project success and success factors for software projects and products. The motivation for this work is to identify the way software practitioners’ value and define project success. This can have implications for both practitioner motivation and software development productivity. Accordingly, in this work, we are interested in the various perceptions of the term “success” for different software practitioners and researchers. To get this information we performed a systematic mapping of the recent year’s software development literature trying to identify stakeholders’ perceptions about the success of a project and also possible differences among the views of the various stakeholders of a project. Some common terms related to project success (success project; software project success factors) were considered in formulating the search strings. The results were limited to twenty-two selected peer-reviewed conferences, papers/journal articles, published between 2003 and 2012

Managing Software Engineering Student Teams Using Pellerin\u27s 4-D System

In this article, we discuss the use of Pellerin’s Four Dimension Leadership System (4-D) as a way to manage teams in a classroom setting. Over a 5-year period, we used a modified version of the 4-D model to manage teams within a senior level Software Engineering capstone course. We found that this approach for team management in a classroom setting led to qualitatively fewer incidents of teams unable to effectively work together, better projects, and greater group cohesion. In this article, we discuss our experience using the 4-D System, which was not originally designed for use in the classroom. We find our modified version of the 4-D System to be viable in a classroom setting and provide the reader with everything needed to implement 4-D in his or her own course

Opiskelijoiden valmistaminen työelämään yliopiston sisäisen ohjelmisto-startupin avulla

Tertiary education aims to prepare computer science students for the working life. While much of the technical principles are covered in lower-level courses, team-based capstone projects are a common way to provide students hands-on experience and teach soft skills. Although such courses help students to gain some of the relevant skills, it is difficult to simulate in a course context what work in a professional software engineering team really is about. Our goal is to understand ways tertiary education institutions prepare students for the working life in software engineering. Firstly, we do this by focusing on the mechanisms that software engineering capstones use to simulate work-life. A literature review of 85 primary studies was conducted for this overview. Secondly, we present a more novel way of teaching industry-relevant skills in an university-lead internal software startup. A case study of such a startup, Software Development Academy (SDA), is presented, along with the experiences of both students and faculty involved in it. Finally, we look into how these approaches might differ. Results indicate that capstone courses differ greatly in ways they are organized. Most often students are divided in teams of 4–6 and get assigned with software projects that the teams then develop from an idea to a robust proof-of-concept. In contrast, students employed in the SDA develop production-level software in exchange for a salary for university clients. Students regarded SDA as a highly relevant and fairly irreplaceable educational experience. Working with production-quality software and having a wide range of responsibilities was perceived integral in giving a thorough skill set for the future. In conclusion, capstones and the internal startup both aim to prepare students for the work-life in software engineering. Capstones do it by simulating professional software engineering in a one-semester experience in a course environment. The internal startup adds a touch of realism to this by being actual work in a relatively safe university context