How to Succeed in Communicating Software Metrics in Organization?

While software metrics are indispensable for quality assurance, using metrics in practice is complicated. Quality, productivity, speed, and efficiency are important factors to be considered in software development (Holmstrom et al. 2006; Svensson 2005). Measuring correct metrics and using them in the right and transparent way contributes to pushing development in a desirable direction, leading to achieving projected goals and outcomes (Staron and Meding 2018). On the other hand, tracking the wrong metrics, and failing to interpret and communicate them properly results in a stressful work environment, conflicts, distrust, lower engagement, and decreased productivity (de Sá Leitão Júnior 2018; Ellis et al. 1991; Staron 2012). To ensure proper and effective use of metrics in organizations, successful communication around metrics is essential (Lindström et al. 2021; Post et al. 2002; Staron and Meding 2015). The purpose of this study is to understand and improve communication about metrics in contexts of contemporary software development practice in organizations. This is achieved by identifying the bottlenecks in the process of communication around metrics and how to overcome them in practice. Drawing on 38 semi-structured interviews and interactive workshops with metrics teams members and stakeholders from three organizations, we identify three interrelated challenges including limited knowledge about metrics and lack of terminology, uncoordinated use of multiple communication channels, and sensitivity of metrics, which influence workplace communication, trust, and performance. Our study shows the importance of developing metrics terminology to ensure the development of a shared understanding of metrics. Further, raising awareness about the affordances such channels as dashboards, email, MS Teams meetings/chat, stand up meetings, reports, etc., commonly used in software organizations, and how they can be combined to successfully transfer information about metrics is essential (Verhulsdonck and Shah 2020). It becomes especially important in remote work practices. Finally, though metrics is a powerful tool for decision making, enhancing transparency, and steering development in the desired direction, they can also turn into finger-pointing, blaming, and a pressing tool, resulting in stress and conflicts (Streit and Pizka 2011). The findings also indicate the importance of creating a culture around metrics, clarifying, and informing about the purpose of metrics in the organization (Umarji and Seaman 2008). We plan to build on the early findings of this study to develop a comprehensive framework for successful software metrics communication within organizations

PARTICULARITIES OF QUALITY EVALUATION IN A SOFTWARE COMPANY

Quality management is a management domain very discussed and disputed nowadays and this is the first sign it is a very modern, needed and present concept in theory and practice. Some are seeing it as a solution to prepare things in the way they are needed, and the instrument which might guarantee a proper environment of keeping them in a specified and constant form. The application of quality management is a quality management system that has to be designed, developed and implemented to achieve the aim of quality. The article has the purpose to briefly present what a quality management system should mean in a software company, why it should be periodically evaluated and how it might be done. In the second part it points out the characteristics of the audit as a general evaluation instrument and the main contribution consists on the author’s endeavor to mark out the particularities of an audit process carried out on a software company, considering the fact that particularization increases the changes to easier and earlier succeed with such an activity on a practical basis.Management, quality management, software quality, quality evaluation, quality audit

Formal aspects of component software (FACS 2010 selected and extended papers)

This issue includes extended versions of selected best papers from the 7th International Workshop on Formal Aspects of Component Software (FACS 2010) held in Guimarães, Portugal on October 14–16, 2010. The component-based software development approach has emerged as a promising paradigm to cope with an ever increasing complexity of present-day software solutions by bringing sound production and engineering principles into software engineering. However, many conceptual and technological issues remain that challenge component-based software development theory and practice. To address these issues, FACS seeks to provide a forum for researchers and practitioners in the areas of component software and formal methods to foster a better understanding of the component-based paradigm and its applications as well as how formal methods can or should be used to make component-based software development succeed

How Copyleft Uses License Rights to Succeed in the Open Source Software Revolution and the Implications for Article 2B

The computer industry moves from one “next great thing” to the next “next great thing” with amazing speed. Graphical user interface, object-oriented programming, client-server computing, multimedia software, Java applets, the network computer, and the Internet have all been hailed as technological breakthroughs at one time or another. Some of these promising developments fizzle, some evolve and succeed slowly, and some revolutionize the industry overnight. Led by a group of software developers known as “hackers,” the latest “next great thing” is “open source” software. The word “source” refers to software in source code form. Source code is the collection of instructions a computer programmer writes to tell a computer what to do. A programmer writes source code in a certain programming language, such as Basic, Pascal, C++, or Java. The source code is understandable to anyone proficient in that language. Using a software tool, source code is converted into a form called binary or executable code that a computer can execute. The word “open” in the context of open source software refers to source code that is freely available and modifiable. Most software publishers distribute their software to the mass market in binary form only. They treat source code as a trade secret and license it selectively on a confidential basis. The open source software movement claims at least two major advantages over traditional commercially developed software. First, hackers claim that by making source code widely available and freely modifiable, programmers can develop higher quality software and fix bugs faster than commercial software developers. Second, they believe that products based on open source software will be relatively inexpensive compared to traditional commercial software. Hackers think they have started a revolution that will overtake the leading commercial software publishers of today. The fact that another revolution has begun in the computer industry is not a surprise. The surprise is that licensing, known as “copyleft,” is at the heart of the revolution. This Article examines the origins and continuing momentum of the open source revolution. It then discusses the principles of open source licensing and why licensing is central to the open source revolution. The Article concludes by discussing the implications that copyleft licensing principles have for proposed Article 2B of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”), a provision that would govern software licenses. The Article points out that in order to foster innovative developments such as the open source revolution, Article 2B needs to, among other things, validate the enforceability of standard-form mass-market licenses, preserve the ability of software developers to freely allocate risk, and provide sensible contract default rules

From Planning to Mature: on the Determinants of Open Source Take-Off

Thanks to a recent and vast empirical literature, we know in details how the most popular open source projects are organized and why they succeed. However open source is not only Linux: in this paper we use a large data-set obtained from SourceForge.net to estimate the main determinants of the progress in the development of a stable and mature code of an open source software. We show that projects geared towards sophisticated users (i.e. system administrators) or projects aimed at developing tools for the Internet, multimedia and software have greater chances to reach an advanced development stage. On the contrary, projects devoted to the production of applications for games and telecommunication as well as projects distributed under highly restrictive licensing terms (GPL) have a significantly smaller probability to advance. Interestingly, we find that the size of the "community of developers" increases the chances of progress but this effect decreases as the community gets larger, a signal of possible coordination problems. Finally, we show that the determinants of projects' development stage change with the age of the project in many dimensions thus supporting the common perception of open source as an extremely dynamic phenomenon.software market, open source software, development status, intended audience, license

ADMIT - A Web-Based System to Facilitate Graduate Admission

In this paper we describe ADMIT, a software application developed to assist the graduate admissions process at the University of Pittsburgh School of Information Sciences (SIS). ADMIT uses a Bayesian network model built from historical admissions data and academic performance records to predict how likely each applicant is to succeed. The system rank-orders applicants based on the probability of their success in the Master of Science in Information Science (MSIS) program and presents results as an ordered list and as a histogram to the admission committee members. The system also enables users to see a graphical representation of the model (a causal graph) and observe how each input data point affects the system’s suggestions