Evaluating the Impact of Critical Factors in Agile Continuous Delivery Process: A System Dynamics Approach

Continuous Delivery is aimed at the frequent delivery of good quality software in a speedy, reliable and efficient fashion – with strong emphasis on automation and team collaboration. However, even with this new paradigm, repeatability of project outcome is still not guaranteed: project performance varies due to the various interacting and inter-related factors in the Continuous Delivery 'system'. This paper presents results from the investigation of various factors, in particular agile practices, on the quality of the developed software in the Continuous Delivery process. Results show that customer involvement and the cognitive ability of the QA have the most significant individual effects on the quality of software in continuous delivery

Supporting Defect Causal Analysis in Practice with Cross-Company Data on Causes of Requirements Engineering Problems

[Context] Defect Causal Analysis (DCA) represents an efficient practice to improve software processes. While knowledge on cause-effect relations is helpful to support DCA, collecting cause-effect data may require significant effort and time. [Goal] We propose and evaluate a new DCA approach that uses cross-company data to support the practical application of DCA. [Method] We collected cross-company data on causes of requirements engineering problems from 74 Brazilian organizations and built a Bayesian network. Our DCA approach uses the diagnostic inference of the Bayesian network to support DCA sessions. We evaluated our approach by applying a model for technology transfer to industry and conducted three consecutive evaluations: (i) in academia, (ii) with industry representatives of the Fraunhofer Project Center at UFBA, and (iii) in an industrial case study at the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES). [Results] We received positive feedback in all three evaluations and the cross-company data was considered helpful for determining main causes. [Conclusions] Our results strengthen our confidence in that supporting DCA with cross-company data is promising and should be further investigated.Comment: 10 pages, 8 figures, accepted for the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE'17

Implementing collaborative improvement, top-down, bottom-up, or both?

The research presented in this paper was aimed at increasing the current understanding of the process of developing collaborative improvement in Extended Manufacturing Enterprises (EME). Based on action research and action learning of three EMEs involving a total of thirteen companies from five European countries, the present study identifies three different approaches to collaborative improvement (CoI), that is, inter-organisational continuous improvement. One approach to CoI focuses on learning at a practical level, developing this knowledge into strategic and theoretical knowledge. We call this the bottom-up learning-bydoing approach. Another approach focuses on goal alignment and assessment to provide a foundation for improvement before actually improving. We call this the top-down directive approach. Yet another approach focuses on shared goals/vision and meeting on equal terms, and joint work in a non-directive matter. This is the laissez-faire approach. The different approaches influence the collaborative improvement results achieved, and how and why they do so is the question addressed this article

Naming the Pain in Requirements Engineering: A Design for a Global Family of Surveys and First Results from Germany

For many years, we have observed industry struggling in defining a high quality requirements engineering (RE) and researchers trying to understand industrial expectations and problems. Although we are investigating the discipline with a plethora of empirical studies, they still do not allow for empirical generalisations. To lay an empirical and externally valid foundation about the state of the practice in RE, we aim at a series of open and reproducible surveys that allow us to steer future research in a problem-driven manner. We designed a globally distributed family of surveys in joint collaborations with different researchers and completed the first run in Germany. The instrument is based on a theory in the form of a set of hypotheses inferred from our experiences and available studies. We test each hypothesis in our theory and identify further candidates to extend the theory by correlation and Grounded Theory analysis. In this article, we report on the design of the family of surveys, its underlying theory, and the full results obtained from Germany with participants from 58 companies. The results reveal, for example, a tendency to improve RE via internally defined qualitative methods rather than relying on normative approaches like CMMI. We also discovered various RE problems that are statistically significant in practice. For instance, we could corroborate communication flaws or moving targets as problems in practice. Our results are not yet fully representative but already give first insights into current practices and problems in RE, and they allow us to draw lessons learnt for future replications. Our results obtained from this first run in Germany make us confident that the survey design and instrument are well-suited to be replicated and, thereby, to create a generalisable empirical basis of RE in practice

On Evidence-based Risk Management in Requirements Engineering

Background: The sensitivity of Requirements Engineering (RE) to the context makes it difficult to efficiently control problems therein, thus, hampering an effective risk management devoted to allow for early corrective or even preventive measures. Problem: There is still little empirical knowledge about context-specific RE phenomena which would be necessary for an effective context- sensitive risk management in RE. Goal: We propose and validate an evidence-based approach to assess risks in RE using cross-company data about problems, causes and effects. Research Method: We use survey data from 228 companies and build a probabilistic network that supports the forecast of context-specific RE phenomena. We implement this approach using spreadsheets to support a light-weight risk assessment. Results: Our results from an initial validation in 6 companies strengthen our confidence that the approach increases the awareness for individual risk factors in RE, and the feedback further allows for disseminating our approach into practice.Comment: 20 pages, submitted to 10th Software Quality Days conference, 201

Towards a Theory of Software Development Expertise

Software development includes diverse tasks such as implementing new features, analyzing requirements, and fixing bugs. Being an expert in those tasks requires a certain set of skills, knowledge, and experience. Several studies investigated individual aspects of software development expertise, but what is missing is a comprehensive theory. We present a first conceptual theory of software development expertise that is grounded in data from a mixed-methods survey with 335 software developers and in literature on expertise and expert performance. Our theory currently focuses on programming, but already provides valuable insights for researchers, developers, and employers. The theory describes important properties of software development expertise and which factors foster or hinder its formation, including how developers' performance may decline over time. Moreover, our quantitative results show that developers' expertise self-assessments are context-dependent and that experience is not necessarily related to expertise.Comment: 14 pages, 5 figures, 26th ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2018), ACM, 201

Nurturing the acorn: helping a small software company onto the CMM ladder

We report on an interaction between a University and a small software development company within the framework of a Teaching Company Scheme. By exploiting the peculiar environment offered by a TCS, the University was able to help the company introduce measures to improve their software development process. Not only have these measures moved the company from level 1 to level 2 of the Capability Maturity Model; they are doubtless also responsible, at least in part, for the company's survival. The fundamental features of the environment which supported this success are discussed, and it is suggested how the approach might be applied elsewhere, either within or independently of a funding framework such as TCS