Tracking Chart 2002 Nike, India 07021539B

This document is part of a digital collection provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University, pertaining to the effects of globalization on the workplace worldwide. Special emphasis is placed on labor rights, working conditions, labor market changes, and union organizing.FLA_2003_Nike_TC_India_07021539B.pdf: 19 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Requirements engineering: a review and research agenda

This paper reviews the area of requirements engineering. It outlines the key concerns to which attention should be devoted by both practitioners, who wish to "reengineer" their development processes, and academics, seeking intellectual challenges. It presents an assessment of the state-of-the-art and draws conclusions in the form of a research agenda

Investigating Automatic Static Analysis Results to Identify Quality Problems: an Inductive Study

Background: Automatic static analysis (ASA) tools examine source code to discover "issues", i.e. code patterns that are symptoms of bad programming practices and that can lead to defective behavior. Studies in the literature have shown that these tools find defects earlier than other verification activities, but they produce a substantial number of false positive warnings. For this reason, an alternative approach is to use the set of ASA issues to identify defect prone files and components rather than focusing on the individual issues. Aim: We conducted an exploratory study to investigate whether ASA issues can be used as early indicators of faulty files and components and, for the first time, whether they point to a decay of specific software quality attributes, such as maintainability or functionality. Our aim is to understand the critical parameters and feasibility of such an approach to feed into future research on more specific quality and defect prediction models. Method: We analyzed an industrial C# web application using the Resharper ASA tool and explored if significant correlations exist in such a data set. Results: We found promising results when predicting defect-prone files. A set of specific Resharper categories are better indicators of faulty files than common software metrics or the collection of issues of all issue categories, and these categories correlate to different software quality attributes. Conclusions: Our advice for future research is to perform analysis on file rather component level and to evaluate the generalizability of categories. We also recommend using larger datasets as we learned that data sparseness can lead to challenges in the proposed analysis proces

Management of Road Infrastructure Safety

Road Infrastructure Safety Management (RISM) refers to a set of procedures that support a road authority in decision making related to the improvement of safety on a road network. Some of these procedures can be applied to existing infrastructure, thus enabling a reactive approach; and other procedures are used in early stages of a project's life-cycle allowing a proactive approach. The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the most well-known procedures and present a series of recommendations for successful road infrastructure safety management. The work described in the paper was completed by the IRTAD sub-working group on Road Infrastructure Safety Management and presented in detail in the respective Report. The methodology followed on this purpose included the description of the most consolidated RISM procedures, the analysis of the use of RISM procedures worldwide and the identification of possible weaknesses and barriers to their implementation, the provision of good practice examples and the contribution to the scientific assessment of procedures. Specifically, the following RISM procedures were considered: Road Safety Impact Assessment (RIA), Efficiency Assessment Tools (EAT), Road Safety Audit (RSA), Network Operation (NO), Road Infrastructure Safety Performance Indicators (SPI), Network Safety Ranking (NSR), Road Assessment Programs (RAP), Road Safety Inspection (RSI), High Risk Sites (HRS) and In-depth Investigation. Each procedure was described along with tools and data needed for its implementation as well as relevant common practices worldwide. A synthesis summarizing the key information for each procedure was also drafted. Based on a survey on 23 IRTAD member countries from worldwide, the lack of resources or tools is the most commonly stated reason for not applying a RISM procedure. This has been frequently found mainly in European countries. Another common reason is the absence of recommendations/guidelines, especially for SPI, RAP, RSI and RSA. This highlights the importance of the presence of some legislation regulating the application of the procedures. Lack of data was found important mainly for SPI, HRS and EAT. Good practices of road infrastructure safety management have been explored in order to find solutions to the issues highlighted by the survey and provide examples about how these issues have been overcome in some countries. Specifically, issues related to data, legal framework, funding, knowledge, tools and dealing with more RISM procedures were addressed. Finally, nine key messages and six recommendations for better Road Infrastructure Safety Management were developed based on the conclusions made