Sarah Beecham

Software Process Improvement Problems in Twelve Software Companies: An Empirical Analysis

In this paper we discuss our study of the problems 12 software companies experienced in software development. In total we present qualitative data collected from 45 focus groups that involved over 200 software staff. We look at how different practitioner groups respond to software process improvement problems. We show our classification and analysis of this data using correspondence analysis. Correspondence analysis is a graphical data representation method new to software development research. The aim of the work we present is to develop a more holistic understanding of the problems practitioners are experiencing in their attempts to improve their software processes. Our main finding is that there is an association between a companys capability maturity and patterns of reported problems. Organizational problems are more associated with high maturity companies than with low maturity companies. Low maturity companies are closely linked to problems relating directly to projects such as documentation, timescales, tools and technology. Our findings also confirm differences in practitioner group problems. Senior managers cite problems with goals, culture and politics. Project managers are concerned with timescales, change management, budgets and estimates. Developers are experiencing problems with requirements, testing, documentation, communication, tools and technology. These associations are displayed graphically through correspondence analysis maps.

Models of motivation in software engineering

Motivation in software engineering is recognized as a key success factor for software projects, but although there are many papers written about motivation in software engineering, the field lacks a comprehensive overview of the area. In particular, several models of motivation have been proposed, but they either rely heavily on one particular model (the job characteristics model), or are quite disparate and difficult to combine. Using the results from our previous systematic literature review (SLR), we constructed a new model of motivation in software engineering. We then compared this new model with existing models and refined it based on this comparison. This paper summarises the SLR results, presents the important existing models found in the literature and explains the development of our new model of motivation in software engineering.

Using an expert panel to validate a requirements process improvement model

In this paper we present components of a newly developed software process improvement model that aims to represent key practices in requirements engineering (RE). Our model is developed in response to practitioner needs highlighted in our empirical work with UK software development companies. We have now reached the stage in model development where we need some independent feedback as to how well our model meets our objectives. We perform this validation through involving a group of software process improvement and RE experts in examining our RE model components and completing a detailed questionnaire. A major part of this paper is devoted to explaining our validation methodology. There is very little in the literature that directly relates to how process models have been validated, therefore providing this transparency will benefit both the research community and practitioners. The validation methodology and the model itself contribute towards a better understanding of modelling RE processes.

Defining a Requirements Process Improvement Model

Both software organisations and the academic community are aware that the requirements phase of software development is in need of further support. We address this problem by creating a specialised Requirements Capability Maturity Model (R-CMM1). The model focuses on the requirements engineering process as defined within the established Software Engineering Institute’s (SEI’s) software process improvement framework. Our empirical work with software practitioners is a primary motivation for creating this requirements engineering process improvement model. Although all organisations in our study were involved in software process improvement (SPI), they all showed a lack of control over many requirement engineering activities.This paper describes how the requirements engineering (RE) process is decomposed and prioritised in accordance with maturity goals set by the SEI’s Software Capability Maturity Model (SW CMM). Our R-CMM builds on the SEI’s framework by identifying and defining recommended RE sub-processes that meet maturity goals. This new focus will help practitioners to define their RE process with a view to setting realistic goals for improvement.

What Do We Know about Developer Motivation

Software engineers will do better work and stay with a company if they are motivated - as a result the success of software projects is likely to improve. The authors use the findings from their in-depth review of the 92 studies published in the last 25 years on software engineer motivation to give an overview of what managers need to know to improve motivation among their employees.

The impact of staff turnover on software projects: the importance of understanding what makes software practitioners tick

In this paper we investigate the impact of staff turnover on software projects. In particular we investigate whether high staff turnover damages project success. We analyse data from an empirical study of 89 software practitioners to show that projects with high staff turnover are less successful. Furthermore our empirical data suggests a relationship between high staff turnover on projects and low staff motivation levels. We discuss factors which have been previously found to improve motivation levels and conclude that improving motivation levels can reduce staff turnover, which in turn increases project success.

Does the XP environment meet the motivational needs of the software developer? An empirical study

This paper examines how XP practice meets the motivational needs of software developers. Interactions with peers have been identified by others as one potential area of (de)motivation but little detail is known. The nature of this motivator, as expressed by software developers themselves, was explored through semi-structured interviews with a high maturity high performing team working on safety critical software applications in a traditional environment. From these interviews, we have identified seven themes which are characteristic indicators of peer motivation. We interrogate observational data from five mature XP teams to consider whether and how these characteristic indicators are present in an XP environment. We find that XP teams in our study had processes in place that supported many of the motivational needs voiced by developers coming from a traditional, heavyweight software development environment. However, the XP environment is at odds with other motivational needs.

An empirical study of maintenance issues within process improvement programmes in the software industry

Anecdotal evidence from our work with software developers suggests that maintenance is a significant problem for software development companies. A problem that is absorbing increasing amounts of precious development effort. In parallel, software companies are increasingly applying process improvement principles to development problems. In this paper we discuss how maintenance is addressed in process improvement programmes. We look at how well maintenance is addressed by formal process models like CMM. We also present empirical evidence from our study of process improvement in UK software companies. Our main findings are that although developers report that maintenance is indeed a problem, it is not always their most important problem. Furthermore, our findings also suggest that companies are often not well prepared for the maintenance phase of developments and that formal process improvement models do not pay enough attention to maintenance.

Exploring motivational differences between software developers and project managers

In this paper, we describe our investigation of the motivational differences between project managers and developers. Motivation has been found to be a central factor in successful software projects. However the motivation of software engineers is generally poorly understood and previous work done in the area is thought to be largely out-of-date. We present data collected from 6 software developers and 4 project managers at a workshop we organized at the XP2006 international conference.