-
Exposing Software Engineering Students to Stressful Projects: Does Diversity Matter?
Authors:
Isabella Graßl,
Gordon Fraser,
Stefan Trieflinger,
Marco Kuhrmann
Abstract:
Software development teams have to face stress caused by deadlines, staff turnover, or individual differences in commitment, expertise, and time zones. While students are typically taught the theory of software project management, their exposure to such stress factors is usually limited. However, preparing students for the stress they will have to endure once they work in project teams is importan…
▽ More
Software development teams have to face stress caused by deadlines, staff turnover, or individual differences in commitment, expertise, and time zones. While students are typically taught the theory of software project management, their exposure to such stress factors is usually limited. However, preparing students for the stress they will have to endure once they work in project teams is important for their own sake, as well as for the sake of team performance in the face of stress. Team performance has been linked to the diversity of software development teams, but little is known about how diversity influences the stress experienced in teams. In order to shed light on this aspect, we provided students with the opportunity to self-experience the basics of project management in self-organizing teams, and studied the impact of six diversity dimensions on team performance, co** with stressors, and positive perceived learning effects. Three controlled experiments at two universities with a total of 65 participants suggest that the social background impacts the perceived stressors the most, while age and work experience have the highest impact on perceived learnings. Most diversity dimensions have a medium correlation with the quality of work, yet no significant relation to the team performance. This lays the foundation to improve students' training for software engineering teamwork based on their diversity-related needs and to create diversity-sensitive awareness among educators, employers and researchers.
△ Less
Submitted 18 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
What Makes Agile Software Development Agile?
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Paolo Tell,
Regina Hebig,
Jil Klünder,
Jürgen Münch,
Oliver Linssen,
Dietmar Pfahl,
Michael Felderer,
Christian R. Prause,
Stephen G. MacDonell,
Joyce Nakatumba-Nabende,
David Raffo,
Sarah Beecham,
Eray Tüzün,
Gustavo López,
Nicolas Paez,
Diego Fontdevila,
Sherlock A. Licorish,
Steffen Küpper,
Günther Ruhe,
Eric Knauss,
Özden Özcan-Top,
Paul Clarke,
Fergal McCaffery,
Marcela Genero
, et al. (22 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders' collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by…
▽ More
Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders' collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by their creator(s), software processes in practice mutate into hybrids over time. Are these still agile? In this article, we investigate the question: what makes a software development method agile? We present an empirical study grounded in a large-scale international survey that aims to identify software development methods and practices that improve or tame agility. Based on 556 data points, we analyze the perceived degree of agility in the implementation of standard project disciplines and its relation to used development methods and practices. Our findings suggest that only a small number of participants operate their projects in a purely traditional or agile manner (under 15%). That said, most project disciplines and most practices show a clear trend towards increasing degrees of agility. Compared to the methods used to develop software, the selection of practices has a stronger effect on the degree of agility of a given discipline. Finally, there are no methods or practices that explicitly guarantee or prevent agility. We conclude that agility cannot be defined solely at the process level. Additional factors need to be taken into account when trying to implement or improve agility in a software company. Finally, we discuss the field of software process-related research in the light of our findings and present a roadmap for future research.
△ Less
Submitted 23 September, 2021;
originally announced September 2021.
-
Towards the statistical construction of hybrid development methods
Authors:
Paolo Tell,
Jil Klünder,
Steffen Küpper,
David Raffo,
Stephen MacDonell,
Jürgen Münch,
Dietmar Pfahl,
Oliver Linssen,
Marco Kuhrmann
Abstract:
Hardly any software development process is used as prescribed by authors or standards. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use hybrid development methods (short: hybrid methods) that combine different development methods and practices. Even though such hybrid methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to systematically cons…
▽ More
Hardly any software development process is used as prescribed by authors or standards. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use hybrid development methods (short: hybrid methods) that combine different development methods and practices. Even though such hybrid methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to systematically construct synergetic practices is missing. In this article, we make a first step towards a statistical construction procedure for hybrid methods. Grounded in 1467 data points from a large-scale practitioner survey, we study the question: What are hybrid methods made of and how can they be systematically constructed? Our findings show that only eight methods and few practices build the core of modern software development. Using an 85% agreement level in the participants' selections, we provide examples illustrating how hybrid methods can be characterized by the practices they are made of. Furthermore, using this characterization, we develop an initial construction procedure, which allows for defining a method frame and enriching it incrementally to devise a hybrid method using ranked sets of practice.
△ Less
Submitted 27 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
2nd Workshop on Hybrid Development Approaches in Software Systems Development
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Philipp Diebold,
Stephen MacDonell,
Jürgen Münch
Abstract:
Software and system development is complex and diverse, and a multitude of development approaches is used and combined with each other to address the manifold challenges companies face today. To study the current state of the practice and to build a sound understanding about the utility of different development approaches and their application to modern software system development, in 2016, we lau…
▽ More
Software and system development is complex and diverse, and a multitude of development approaches is used and combined with each other to address the manifold challenges companies face today. To study the current state of the practice and to build a sound understanding about the utility of different development approaches and their application to modern software system development, in 2016, we launched the HELENA initiative. This paper introduces the 2nd HELENA workshop and provides an overview of the current project state. In the workshop, six teams present initial findings from their regions, impulse talk are given, and further steps of the HELENA roadmap are discussed.
△ Less
Submitted 9 April, 2021;
originally announced April 2021.
-
Catching up with Method and Process Practice: An Industry-Informed Baseline for Researchers
Authors:
Jil Klünder,
Regina Hebig,
Paolo Tell,
Marco Kuhrmann,
Joyce Nakatumba-Nabende,
Rogardt Heldal,
Stephan Krusche,
Masud Fazal-Baqaie,
Michael Felderer,
Marcela Fabiana Genero Bocco,
Steffen Küpper,
Sherlock A. Licorish,
Gustavo Lòpez,
Fergal McCaffery,
Özden Özcan Top,
Christian R. Prause,
Rafael Prikladnicki,
Eray Tüzün,
Dietmar Pfahl,
Kurt Schneider,
Stephen G. MacDonell
Abstract:
Software development methods are usually not applied by the book. Companies are under pressure to continuously deploy software products that meet market needs and stakeholders' requests. To implement efficient and effective development processes, companies utilize multiple frameworks, methods and practices, and combine these into hybrid methods. A common combination contains a rich management fram…
▽ More
Software development methods are usually not applied by the book. Companies are under pressure to continuously deploy software products that meet market needs and stakeholders' requests. To implement efficient and effective development processes, companies utilize multiple frameworks, methods and practices, and combine these into hybrid methods. A common combination contains a rich management framework to organize and steer projects complemented with a number of smaller practices providing the development teams with tools to complete their tasks. In this paper, based on 732 data points collected through an international survey, we study the software development process use in practice. Our results show that 76.8% of the companies implement hybrid methods. Company size as well as the strategy in devising and evolving hybrid methods affect the suitability of the chosen process to reach company or project goals. Our findings show that companies that combine planned improvement programs with process evolution can increase their process' suitability by up to 5%.
△ Less
Submitted 28 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
Walking Through the Method Zoo: Does Higher Education really meet Software Industry Demands?
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Joyce Nakatumba-Nabende,
Rolf-Helge Pfeiffer,
Paolo Tell,
Jil Klünder,
Tayana Conte,
Stephen G. MacDonell,
Regina Hebig
Abstract:
Software engineering educators are continually challenged by rapidly evolving concepts, technologies, and industry demands. Due to the omnipresence of software in a digitalized society, higher education institutions (HEIs) have to educate the students such that they learn how to learn, and that they are equipped with a profound basic knowledge and with latest knowledge about modern software and sy…
▽ More
Software engineering educators are continually challenged by rapidly evolving concepts, technologies, and industry demands. Due to the omnipresence of software in a digitalized society, higher education institutions (HEIs) have to educate the students such that they learn how to learn, and that they are equipped with a profound basic knowledge and with latest knowledge about modern software and system development. Since industry demands change constantly, HEIs are challenged in meeting such current and future demands in a timely manner. This paper analyzes the current state of practice in software engineering education. Specifically, we want to compare contemporary education with industrial practice to understand if frameworks, methods and practices for software and system development taught at HEIs reflect industrial practice. For this, we conducted an online survey and collected information about 67 software engineering courses. Our findings show that development approaches taught at HEIs quite closely reflect industrial practice. We also found that the choice of what process to teach is sometimes driven by the wish to make a course successful. Especially when this happens for project courses, it could be beneficial to put more emphasis on building learning sequences with other courses.
△ Less
Submitted 20 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
What are Hybrid Development Methods Made Of? An Evidence-based Characterization
Authors:
Paolo Tell,
Jil Klünder,
Steffen Küpper,
David Raffo,
Stephen G. MacDonell,
Jürgen Münch,
Dietmar Pfahl,
Oliver Linssen,
Marco Kuhrmann
Abstract:
Among the multitude of software development processes available, hardly any is used by the book. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use customized processes that combine different development methods -- so-called hybrid development methods. Even though such hybrid development methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to s…
▽ More
Among the multitude of software development processes available, hardly any is used by the book. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use customized processes that combine different development methods -- so-called hybrid development methods. Even though such hybrid development methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to systematically construct synergetic practices is missing. In this paper, we make a first step towards devising such guidelines. Grounded in 1,467 data points from a large-scale online survey among practitioners, we study the current state of practice in process use to answer the question: What are hybrid development methods made of? Our findings reveal that only eight methods and few practices build the core of modern software development. This small set allows for statistically constructing hybrid development methods. Using an 85% agreement level in the participants' selections, we provide two examples illustrating how hybrid development methods are characterized by the practices they are made of. Our evidence-based analysis approach lays the foundation for devising hybrid development methods.
△ Less
Submitted 20 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
Determining Context Factors for Hybrid Development Methods with Trained Models
Authors:
Jil Klünder,
Dzejlana Karajic,
Paolo Tell,
Oliver Karras,
Christian Münkel,
Jürgen Münch,
Stephen G. MacDonell,
Regina Hebig,
Marco Kuhrmann
Abstract:
Selecting a suitable development method for a specific project context is one of the most challenging activities in process design. Every project is unique and, thus, many context factors have to be considered. Recent research took some initial steps towards statistically constructing hybrid development methods, yet, paid little attention to the peculiarities of context factors influencing method…
▽ More
Selecting a suitable development method for a specific project context is one of the most challenging activities in process design. Every project is unique and, thus, many context factors have to be considered. Recent research took some initial steps towards statistically constructing hybrid development methods, yet, paid little attention to the peculiarities of context factors influencing method and practice selection. In this paper, we utilize exploratory factor analysis and logistic regression analysis to learn such context factors and to identify methods that are correlated with these factors. Our analysis is based on 829 data points from the HELENA dataset. We provide five base clusters of methods consisting of up to 10 methods that lay the foundation for devising hybrid development methods. The analysis of the five clusters using trained models reveals only a few context factors, e.g., project/product size and target application domain, that seem to significantly influence the selection of methods. An extended descriptive analysis of these practices in the context of the identified method clusters also suggests a consolidation of the relevant practice sets used in specific project contexts.
△ Less
Submitted 14 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
-
A Family of Experiments on Test-Driven Development
Authors:
Adrian Santos,
Sira Vegas,
Oscar Dieste,
Fernando Uyaguari,
Aysee Tosun,
Davide Fucci,
Burak Turhan,
Giuseppe Scanniello,
Simone Romano,
Itir Karac,
Marco Kuhrmann,
Vladimir Mandic,
Robert Ramac,
Dietmar Pfahl,
Christian Engblom,
Jarno Kyykka,
Kerli Rungi,
Carolina Palomeque,
Jaroslav Spisak,
Markku Oivo,
Natalia Juristo
Abstract:
Context: Test-driven development (TDD) is an agile software development approach that has been widely claimed to improve software quality. However, the extent to which TDD improves quality appears to be largely dependent upon the characteristics of the study in which it is evaluated (e.g., the research method, participant type, programming environment, etc.). The particularities of each study make…
▽ More
Context: Test-driven development (TDD) is an agile software development approach that has been widely claimed to improve software quality. However, the extent to which TDD improves quality appears to be largely dependent upon the characteristics of the study in which it is evaluated (e.g., the research method, participant type, programming environment, etc.). The particularities of each study make the aggregation of results untenable. Objectives: The goal of this paper is to: increase the accuracy and generalizability of the results achieved in isolated experiments on TDD, provide joint conclusions on the performance of TDD across different industrial and academic settings, and assess the extent to which the characteristics of the experiments affect the quality-related performance of TDD. Method: We conduct a family of 12 experiments on TDD in academia and industry. We aggregate their results by means of meta-analysis. We perform exploratory analyses to identify variables impacting the quality-related performance of TDD. Results: TDD novices achieve a slightly higher code quality with iterative test-last development (i.e., ITL, the reverse approach of TDD) than with TDD. The task being developed largely determines quality. The programming environment, the order in which TDD and ITL are applied, or the learning effects from one development approach to another do not appear to affect quality. The quality-related performance of professionals using TDD drops more than for students. We hypothesize that this may be due to their being more resistant to change and potentially less motivated than students. Conclusion: Previous studies seem to provide conflicting results on TDD performance (i.e., positive vs. negative, respectively). We hypothesize that these conflicting results may be due to different study durations, experiment participants being unfamiliar with the TDD process...
△ Less
Submitted 24 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Artefacts in Software Engineering: A Fundamental Positioning
Authors:
D. Méndez Fernández,
W. Böhm,
A. Vogelsang,
J. Mund,
M. Broy,
M. Kuhrmann,
T. Weyer
Abstract:
Artefacts play a vital role in software and systems development processes. Other terms like documents, deliverables, or work products are widely used in software development communities instead of the term artefact. In the following, we use the term `artefact' including all these other terms. Despite its relevance, the exact denotation of the term `artefact' is still not clear due to a variety of…
▽ More
Artefacts play a vital role in software and systems development processes. Other terms like documents, deliverables, or work products are widely used in software development communities instead of the term artefact. In the following, we use the term `artefact' including all these other terms. Despite its relevance, the exact denotation of the term `artefact' is still not clear due to a variety of different understandings of the term and to a careless negligent usage. This often leads to approaches being grounded in a fuzzy, unclear understanding of the essential concepts involved. In fact, there does not exist a common terminology. Therefore, it is our goal that the term artefact be standardised so that researchers and practitioners have a common understanding for discussions and contributions. In this position paper, we provide a positioning and critical reflection upon the notion of artefact in software engineering at different levels of perception and how these relate to each other. We further contribute a meta model that provides a description of an artefact that is independent from any underlying process model. This meta model defines artefacts at three levels. Abstraction and refinement relations between these levels allow correlating artefacts to each other and defining the notion of related, refined, and equivalent artefacts. Our contribution shall foster the long overdue and too often underestimated terminological discussion on what artefacts are to provide a common ground with clearer concepts and principles for future software engineering contributions, such as the design of artefact-oriented development processes and tools.
△ Less
Submitted 26 November, 2018; v1 submitted 31 May, 2018;
originally announced June 2018.
-
On Evidence-based Risk Management in Requirements Engineering
Authors:
Daniel Méndez Fernández,
Michaela Tießler,
Marcos Kalinowski,
Michael Felderer,
Marco Kuhrmann
Abstract:
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…
▽ More
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.
△ Less
Submitted 31 July, 2017; v1 submitted 1 July, 2017;
originally announced July 2017.
-
On the Use of Variability Operations in the V-Modell XT Software Process Line
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Daniel Méndez Fernández,
Thomas Ternité
Abstract:
Software process lines provide a systematic approach to develop and manage software processes. It defines a reference process containing general process assets, whereas a well-defined customization approach allows process engineers to create new process variants, e.g., by extending or modifying process assets. Variability operations are an instrument to realize flexibility by explicitly declaring…
▽ More
Software process lines provide a systematic approach to develop and manage software processes. It defines a reference process containing general process assets, whereas a well-defined customization approach allows process engineers to create new process variants, e.g., by extending or modifying process assets. Variability operations are an instrument to realize flexibility by explicitly declaring required modifications, which are applied to create a procedurally generated company-specific process. However, little is known about which variability operations are suitable in practice. In this article, we present a study on the feasibility of variability operations to support the development of software process lines in the context of the V-Modell XT. We analyze which variability operations are defined and practically used. We provide an initial catalog of variability operations as an improvement proposal for other process models. Our findings show that 69 variability operation types are defined across several metamodel versions of which, however, 25 remain unused. The found variability operations allow for systematically modifying the content of process model elements and the process documentation, and they allow for altering the structure of a process model and its description. Furthermore, we also find that variability operations can help process engineers to compensate process metamodel evolution.
△ Less
Submitted 19 February, 2017;
originally announced February 2017.
-
From Pragmatic to Systematic Software Process Improvement: An Evaluated Approach
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Daniel Méndez Fernández
Abstract:
Software processes improvement (SPI) is a challenging task, as many different stakeholders, project settings, and contexts and goals need to be considered. SPI projects are often operated in a complex and volatile environment and, thus, require a sound management that is resource-intensive requiring many stakeholders to contribute to the process assessment, analysis, design, realisation, and deplo…
▽ More
Software processes improvement (SPI) is a challenging task, as many different stakeholders, project settings, and contexts and goals need to be considered. SPI projects are often operated in a complex and volatile environment and, thus, require a sound management that is resource-intensive requiring many stakeholders to contribute to the process assessment, analysis, design, realisation, and deployment. Although there exist many valuable SPI approaches, none address the needs of both process engineers and project managers. This article presents an Artefact-based Software Process Improvement & Management approach (ArSPI) that closes this gap. ArSPI was developed and tested across several SPI projects in large organisations in Germany and Eastern Europe. The approach further encompasses a template for initiating, performing, and managing SPI projects by defining a set of 5 key artefacts and 24 support artefacts. We present ArSPI and discus results of its validation indicating ArSPI to be a helpful instrument to set up and steer SPI projects.
△ Less
Submitted 19 February, 2017;
originally announced February 2017.
-
On the Pragmatic Design of Literature Studies in Software Engineering: An Experience-based Guideline
Authors:
M. Kuhrmann,
D. Méndez Fernández,
M. Daneva
Abstract:
Systematic literature studies have received much attention in empirical software engineering in recent years. They have become a powerful tool to collect and structure reported knowledge in a systematic and reproducible way. We distinguish systematic literature reviews to systematically analyze reported evidence in depth, and systematic map** studies to structure a field of interest in a broader…
▽ More
Systematic literature studies have received much attention in empirical software engineering in recent years. They have become a powerful tool to collect and structure reported knowledge in a systematic and reproducible way. We distinguish systematic literature reviews to systematically analyze reported evidence in depth, and systematic map** studies to structure a field of interest in a broader, usually quantified manner. Due to the rapidly increasing body of knowledge in software engineering, researchers who want to capture the published work in a domain often face an extensive amount of publications, which need to be screened, rated for relevance, classified, and eventually analyzed. Although there are several guidelines to conduct literature studies, they do not yet help researchers co** with the specific difficulties encountered in the practical application of these guidelines. In this article, we present an experience-based guideline to aid researchers in designing systematic literature studies with special emphasis on the data collection and selection procedures. Our guideline aims at providing a blueprint for a practical and pragmatic path through the plethora of currently available practices and deliverables capturing the dependencies among the single steps. The guideline emerges from various map** studies and literature reviews conducted by the authors and provides recommendations for the general study design, data collection, and study selection procedures. Finally, we share our experiences and lessons learned in applying the different practices of the proposed guideline.
△ Less
Submitted 12 December, 2016;
originally announced December 2016.
-
Orchestration of Global Software Engineering Projects
Authors:
Christian Bartelt,
Manfred Broy,
Christoph Herrmann,
Eric Knauss,
Marco Kuhrmann,
Andreas Rausch,
Bernhard Rumpe,
Kurt Schneider
Abstract:
Global software engineering has become a fact in many companies due to real necessity in practice. In contrast to co-located projects global projects face a number of additional software engineering challenges. Among them quality management has become much more difficult and schedule and budget overruns can be observed more often. Compared to co-located projects global software engineering is even…
▽ More
Global software engineering has become a fact in many companies due to real necessity in practice. In contrast to co-located projects global projects face a number of additional software engineering challenges. Among them quality management has become much more difficult and schedule and budget overruns can be observed more often. Compared to co-located projects global software engineering is even more challenging due to the need for integration of different cultures, different languages, and different time zones - across companies, and across countries. The diversity of development locations on several levels seriously endangers an effective and goal-oriented progress of projects. In this position paper we discuss reasons for global development, sketch settings for distribution and views of orchestration of dislocated companies in a global project that can be seen as a "virtual project environment". We also present a collection of questions, which we consider relevant for global software engineering. The questions motivate further discussion to derive a research agenda in global software engineering.
△ Less
Submitted 22 September, 2014;
originally announced September 2014.
-
Teaching Software Process Modeling
Authors:
Marco Kuhrmann,
Daniel Méndez Fernández,
Jürgen Münch
Abstract:
Most university curricula consider software processes to be on the fringes of software engineering (SE). Students are told there exists a plethora of software processes ranging from RUP over V-shaped processes to agile methods. Furthermore, the usual students' programming tasks are of a size that either one student or a small group of students can manage the work. Comprehensive processes being ess…
▽ More
Most university curricula consider software processes to be on the fringes of software engineering (SE). Students are told there exists a plethora of software processes ranging from RUP over V-shaped processes to agile methods. Furthermore, the usual students' programming tasks are of a size that either one student or a small group of students can manage the work. Comprehensive processes being essential for large companies in terms of reflecting the organization structure, coordinating teams, or interfaces to business processes such as contracting or sales, are complex and hard to teach in a lecture, and, therefore, often out of scope. We experienced tutorials on using Java or C#, or on develo** applications for the iPhone to gather more attention by students, simply speaking, as these are more fun for them. So, why should students spend their time in software processes? From our experiences and the discussions with a variety of industrial partners, we learned that students often face trouble when taking their first "real" jobs, even if the company is organized in a lean or agile shape. Therefore, we propose to include software processes more explicitly into the SE curricula. We designed and implemented a course at Master's level in which students learn why software processes are necessary, and how they can be analyzed, designed, implemented, and continuously improved. In this paper, we present our course's structure, its goals, and corresponding teaching methods. We evaluate the course and further discuss our experiences so that lecturers and researchers can directly use our lessons learned in their own curricula.
△ Less
Submitted 18 December, 2013;
originally announced December 2013.
