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

Abstract

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.

Digital Transformation in Complex Systems

“…The importance of the system architecture has been acknowledged in several previous studies in the field of CoPS and often connected to the type of knowledge necessary for CoPS development over time [14], [34], [35] and the corresponding organizations in which these CoPS systems are developed and operate [21]. Recently, Tamburri et al [72] have argued that future software-based systems require perpetual interaction and feedback across organizational and technical structures implying a dynamic mirroring between organizations and system architectures.…”

A Systemic Approach to Evaluating the Organizational Agility in Large-Scale Companies

“…Managers of the bank act from the position of traditional project management. The more directive discussion, the more latent dissent exhibit developers [12] The teams use three types of metrics that are displayed on special information panels. They pay attention to product metrics, system health metrics, and process metrics (production metrics) Business metrics are not detailed enough: product metrics are based on high-level increments and Time-to-market, team performance assessed by velocity.…”

“…In this paper we define and assess the overall efficiency as the conformity of the actual process with its design. It requires an analysis of the overall culture of an organization and the mindset of its stakeholders and employees, and how such culture and mindsets are translated in the principles guiding software development, and then to the daily practices [12]. There are several approaches to assess agile frameworks and their implementation:…”

Practices for Managing Machine Learning Products: a Multivocal Literature Review

“…This work aims to bring the entire lifecycle of an ML product more broadly, covering the different roles of managers, data scientists, software engineers, and designers. Therefore, based on the already known models, we inserted processes from Product Engineering, such as Problem Understanding, Solution Design, and Product Management, besides Software Engineering [20], as they are fundamental in general software product development.…”