How do Process and Team Interaction Depend on Development Technologies?

Context: To be more flexible, companies call more and more for an independence between development tools and processes. To enable this form of decoupling we need to understand the interrelation of processes and development tools. However, knowledge about that field is rare.Goal: The goal of this study is to better understand how technologies in use might impact the processes and team interaction.Method: Therefore, we conducted a case study at Ericsson using grounded theory, performing a series of interviews among 6 senior developers and architects. The investigated case is special in that alternative tooling/language settings are used to build the different parts of the same system.Results: As a result we identified several relations between process and tooling. We further report on additional observation about human factors involved in development.Conclusion: The findings show that a bad choice of technologies can lead to unexpected impacts on team dynamics.

[1]  Vinay Kulkarni,et al.  Early experience with agile methodology in a model-driven approach , 2011, MODELS'11.

[2]  Carolyn B. Seaman,et al.  Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[3]  Daniela Damian,et al.  What Is Revolutionary, What Remains the Same? , 2012 .

[4]  B SeamanCarolyn.  Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering , 1999 .

[5]  Håkan Burden,et al.  Comparing and contrasting model-driven engineering at three large companies , 2014, ESEM '14.

[6]  H. Dieter Rombach.  Integrated Software Process and Product Lines , 2005, ISPW.

[7]  Marco Kuhrmann,et al.  Criteria for software process tailoring: a systematic review , 2013, ICSSP 2013.

[8]  Mark Rouncefield,et al.  The State of Practice in Model-Driven Engineering , 2014, IEEE Software.

[9]  A. Strauss,et al.  Grounded theory , 2017 .

[10]  Regina Hebig,et al.  Lessons Learned from Co-Evolution of Software Process and Model-Driven Engineering , 2016 .

[11]  Michael Diaz,et al.  How Software Process Improvement Helped Motorola , 1997, IEEE Softw..

[12]  Michel R. V. Chaudron,et al.  The Impact of Model Driven Development on the Software Architecture Process , 2010, 2010 36th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications.

[13]  Per Runeson,et al.  Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering , 2009, Empirical Software Engineering.

[14]  Regina Hebig,et al.  On the need to study the impact of model driven engineering on software processes , 2014, ICSSP 2014.

[15]  Emilio Insfran,et al.  An Agile Method for Model-Driven Requirements Engineering , 2011, ICSEA 2011.

[16]  Elmar Jürgens,et al.  Automatability of Coupled Evolution of Metamodels and Models in Practice , 2008, MoDELS.

[17]  Mira Kajko-Mattsson,et al.  Developer-driven big-bang process transition from Scrum to Kanban , 2011, ICSSP '11.

[18]  Félix García,et al.  Requirements and constructors for tailoring software processes: a systematic literature review , 2012, Software Quality Journal.

[19]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  Rationale modeling for software process evolution , 2009, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..

[20]  Marco Kuhrmann,et al.  Realizing software process lines: insights and experiences , 2014, ICSSP 2014.

[21]  Mohsen Asadi,et al.  MDA-Based Methodologies: An Analytical Survey , 2008, ECMDA-FA.

[22]  Miroslaw Staron,et al.  Adopting model driven software development in industry: a case study at two companies , 2006, MoDELS'06.

[23]  Daniela E. Damian,et al.  Transition to model-driven engineering: what is revolutionary, what remains the same? , 2012, MODELS'12.

[24]  Holger Giese,et al.  On the complex nature of MDE evolution and its impact on changeability , 2017, Software & Systems Modeling.

[25]  Mika Karaila,et al.  Evolution of a Domain Specific Language and its engineering environment-Lehman ’ s laws revisited , 2009 .