Empirical evaluation of a process to increase consensus in group architectural decision making

CONTEXT : Many software architectural decisions are group decisions rather than decisions made by individuals. Consensus in a group of decision makers increases the acceptance of a decision among decision makers and their confidence in that decision. Furthermore, going through the process of reaching consensus means that decision makers understand better the decision (including the decision topic, decision options, rationales, and potential outcomes). Little guidance exists on how to increase consensus in group architectural decision making. OBJECTIVE : We evaluate how a newly proposed process (named GADGET) helps architects increase consensus when making group architectural decisions. Specifically, we investigate how well GADGET increases consensus in group architectural decision making, by understanding its practical applicability, and by comparing GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. METHOD : We conducted two empirical studies. First, we conducted an exploratory case study to understand the practical applicability of GADGET in industry. We investigated whether there is a need to increase consensus, the effort and benefits of GADGET, and potential improvements for GADGET. Second, we conducted an experiment with 113 students from three universities to compare GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. RESULTS : GADGET helps decision makers increase their consensus, captures knowledge on architectural decisions, clarifies the different points of view of different decision makers on the decision, and increases the focus of the group discussions about a decision. From the experiment, we obtained causal evidence that GADGET increases consensus better than group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. CONCLUSIONS : There is a need to increase consensus in group architectural decisions. GADGET helps inexperienced architects increase consensus in group architectural decision making, and provides additional benefits, such as capturing rationale of decisions. Future work is needed to understand and improve other aspects of group architectural decision making.http://www.elsevier.com/locate/infsof2017-04-30hb2016Computer Scienc

Редукция многопозиционных задач и гибридизация критериев принятия решений

Проблематика. Оскільки прийняття рішень завжди зачіпає багато підходів й евристик, а також недостатня статистика і хід часу можуть породжувати цілі послідовності задач прийняття рішень, то розглядається задача врахування множинних станів і критеріїв. Мета дослідження. Розробка методу редукції загальної задачі прийняття рішень з множинними станами поряд з урахуванням множинних критеріїв через їх гібридизацію для однозначного розв’язання єдиної задачі прийняття рішень. Методика реалізації. Пропонується алгоритм зведення скінченної множини задач прийняття рішень до єдиної задачі прийняття рішень. Також формалізується гібридизація критеріїв прийняття рішень, яка дає змогу отримати єдину множину оптимальних альтернатив. Результати дослідження. На практиці ця множина містить лише одну альтернативу. Тут, завдяки дії закону великих чисел (множинних критеріїв), чим більше число критеріїв, що залучаються до гібридизації, тим більш надійним, згідно зі сформульованим виразом, виходить рішення. Висновки. Представлені редукція багатопозиційних задач і гібридизація критеріїв прийняття рішень забезпечують для дослідника одну задачу прийняття рішень, число оптимальних розв’язків якої має бути меншим, ніж за будь-якими іншими підходами. Також це дає змогу ранжувати альтернативи з більшими надійністю та достовірністю. Крім того, утворюються надійні ваги (пріоритети) для скаляризації багатокритеріальних задач.Background. Due to that decision making is always involving a great deal of approaches and heuristics, and poor statistics and time course can generate series of decision making problems, the problem of regarding multiple states and criteria is considered. Objective. The goal is to develop an approach for reducing the multiple state decision making problem along with regarding multiple criteria by their hybridization to solve disambiguously a single decision making problem. Methods. An algorithm of reducing a finite series of decision making problems to a single problem is suggested. Also a statement is formulated to hybridize decision making criteria allowing to get a single optimal alternatives’ set. Results. Practically, this set contains just a single alternative. And, owing to the law of large numbers (of multiple criteria), the greater number of criteria is involved into the hybridization, the more reliable decision by the formulated statement is. Conclusions. The represented multiple state problem reduction and decision making criteria hybridization both provide a researcher with the one decision making problem whose number of optimal solutions must be less than that by any other approaches. Besides, it allows to rank alternatives at higher reliability and validity. Furthermore, reliable weights (priorities) for scalarizing multicriteria problems are produced.Проблематика. Поскольку принятие решений всегда затрагивает много подходов и эвристик, а также недостаточная статистика и течение времени могут порождать целые последовательности задач принятия решений, то рассматривается задача учета множественных состояний и критериев. Цель исследования. Разработка метода редукции общей задачи принятия решений с множественными состояниями наряду с учетом множественных критериев путем их гибридизации для однозначного решения единственной задачи принятия решений. Методика реализации. Предлагается алгоритм приведения конечного множества задач принятия решений к единственной задаче принятия решений. Также формализуется гибридизация критериев принятия решений, позволяющая получить единственное множество оптимальных альтернатив. Результаты исследования. На практике это множество содержит всего лишь единственную альтернативу. Здесь, благодаря действию закона больших чисел (множественных критериев), чем больше число критериев, вовлекаемых в гибридизацию, тем более надежным, согласно сформулированному выражению, выходит решение. Выводы. Представленные редукция многопозиционных задач и гибридизация критериев принятия решений обеспечивают для исследователя одну задачу принятия решений, число оптимальных решений которой должно быть меньше, чем согласно любым другим подходам. Также это позволяет ранжировать альтернативы с большими надежностью и достоверностью. Кроме того, создаются надежные веса (приоритеты) для скаляризации многокритериальных задач

An Empirical Study on Collaborative Architecture Decision Making in Software Teams

Architecture decision making is considered one of the most challenging cognitive tasks in software development. The objective of this study is to explore the state of the practice of architecture decision making in software teams, including the role of the architect and the associated challenges. An exploratory case study was conducted in a large software company in Europe and fifteen software architects were interviewed as the primary method of data collection. The results reveal that the majority of software teams make architecture decisions collaboratively. Especially, the consultative decision- making style is preferred as it helps to make decisions efficiently while taking the opinions of the team members into consideration. It is observed that most of the software architects maintain a close relationship with the software teams. Several organisational, process and human related challenges and their impact on architecture decision-making are also identified

Empirical evaluation of a process to increase consensus in group architectural decision making

CONTEXT : Many software architectural decisions are group decisions rather than decisions made by individuals. Consensus in a group of decision makers increases the acceptance of a decision among decision makers and their confidence in that decision. Furthermore, going through the process of reaching consensus means that decision makers understand better the decision (including the decision topic, decision options, rationales, and potential outcomes). Little guidance exists on how to increase consensus in group architectural decision making. OBJECTIVE : We evaluate how a newly proposed process (named GADGET) helps architects increase consensus when making group architectural decisions. Specifically, we investigate how well GADGET increases consensus in group architectural decision making, by understanding its practical applicability, and by comparing GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. METHOD : We conducted two empirical studies. First, we conducted an exploratory case study to understand the practical applicability of GADGET in industry. We investigated whether there is a need to increase consensus, the effort and benefits of GADGET, and potential improvements for GADGET. Second, we conducted an experiment with 113 students from three universities to compare GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. RESULTS : GADGET helps decision makers increase their consensus, captures knowledge on architectural decisions, clarifies the different points of view of different decision makers on the decision, and increases the focus of the group discussions about a decision. From the experiment, we obtained causal evidence that GADGET increases consensus better than group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach. CONCLUSIONS : There is a need to increase consensus in group architectural decisions. GADGET helps inexperienced architects increase consensus in group architectural decision making, and provides additional benefits, such as capturing rationale of decisions. Future work is needed to understand and improve other aspects of group architectural decision making.http://www.elsevier.com/locate/infsof2017-04-30hb2016Computer Scienc