Dynamic networked organizations for software engineering

Tamburri, Damian A.; Boer, R. de; Nitto, Elisabetta Di; Lago, Patricia; Vliet, Hans van

doi:10.1145/2501535.2501537

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the literature offers interesting studies focusing on the applicability to GSE of various process paradigms, and in particular of Scrum [11]. Other studies discuss issues and topics such as the impact of architectural choices on the development process [10] and the value of exploiting innovative tools to support awareness [21], or report specific success stories of cooperation either within large companies or among SMEs [31]. Unfortunately, despite the large amount of work, so far it is still difficult to draw general lessons and conclusions from the cases that have been proposed by the research community.…”

Section: Global Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software process

Fuggetta

Nitto

2014

Future of Software Engineering Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is a travelogue of Software Process research and practice in the past 15 years. It is based on the paper written by one of the authors for the FOSE Track at ICSE 2000. Since then, the landscape of Software Process research has significantly evolved: technological breakthroughs and market disruptions have defined new and complex challenges for Software Engineering researchers and practitioners.In this paper we provide an overview of the current status of research and practice, highlight new challenges, and provide a non-exhaustive list of research issues that, in our view, need to be tackled by future research work.

show abstract

Section: Global Software Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software process

Fuggetta

Nitto

2014

Future of Software Engineering Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 incorporates people themes (subversion [15], organizational structure and motivation [16], agility [17]) as well as themes that discuss internal software product characteristics, that is, themes of characteristics of the product which are not perceived externally by end-usersspecifically, the quality of documentation [18], user-centric design [19], software measurement [20], software planning and estimation [21]. Finally, this area contains best-practices evaluation and monitoring, which is often considered orthogonal to all of the above but empirically is linked to the emergence of subversion [22] and is reportedly connected to software planning and effort estimations.…”

Section: B Success and Failure Distilled: Topic Modeling Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success and Failure in Software Engineering: A Followup Systematic Literature Review

Tamburri

Palomba

Kazman

2021

IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Success and failure in software engineering are still among the least understood phenomena in the discipline. In a recent special journal issue on the topic, Mäntylä et al. started discussing these topics from different angles; the authors focused their contributions on offering a general overview of both topics without deeper detail. Recognizing the importance and impact of the topic, in this article we have executed a followup, more in-depth systematic literature review with additional analyses beyond what was previously provided. These new analyses offer: a grounded-theory of success and failure factors, harvesting over 500+ factors from the literature; 14 manually validated clusters of factors that provide relevant areas for success-and failure-specific measurement and risk-analysis; a quality model composed of previously unmeasured organizational structure quantities which are germane to software product, process, and community quality. We show that the topics of success and failure deserve further study as well as further automated tool support, e.g., monitoring tools and metrics able to track the factors and patterns emerging from this article. This article provides managers with risks as well as a more fine-grained analysis of the parameters that can be appraised to anticipate the risks.

show abstract

“…5 incorporates people themes (subversion [15], organizational structure and motivation [16], agility [17]) as well as themes that discuss internal software product characteristics, that is, themes of characteristics of the product which are not perceived externally by end-users-specifically, the quality of documentation [18], user-centric design [19], software measurement [20], software planning and estimation [21]. Finally, this area contains best-practices evaluation and monitoring which is often considered orthogonal to all of the above but empirically is linked to the emergence of subversion [22] and is reportedly connected to software planning and effort estimations.…”

Section: Success and Failure Distilled: Topic Modelling Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success and Failure in Software Engineering: a Followup Systematic Literature Review

Tamburri¹,

Member-at-Large²,

Palomba³

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Success and failure in software engineering are still among the least understood phenomena in the discipline. In a recent special journal issue on the topic, M äntyl ä et al. started discussing these topics from different angles; the authors focused their contributions on offering a general overview of both topics without deeper detail. Recognising the importance and impact of the topic, we have executed a followup, more in-depth systematic literature review with additional analyses beyond what was previously provided. These new analyses offer: (a) a grounded-theory of success and failure factors, harvesting over 500+ factors from the literature; (b) 14 manually-validated clusters of factors that provide relevant areas for successand failure-specific measurement and risk-analysis; (c) a quality model composed of previously unmeasured organizational structure quantities which are germane to software product, process, and community quality. We show that the topics of success and failure deserve further study as well as further automated tool support, e.g., monitoring tools and metrics able to track the factors and patterns emerging from our study. This paper provides managers with risks as well as a more fine-grained analysis of the parameters that can be appraised to anticipate the risks.

show abstract

Dynamic networked organizations for software engineering

Cited by 4 publications

References 21 publications

Software process

Software process

Success and Failure in Software Engineering: A Followup Systematic Literature Review

Success and Failure in Software Engineering: a Followup Systematic Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About