Benefits of global software development: exploring the unexplored

Organizations are increasingly moving to the global software development (GSD) model because of significant benefits that can accrue. However, GSD is fraught with challenges arising from geographical, temporal and socio-cultural distances. The emphasis in the literature to date has typically been on how to overcome the challenges associated with GSD. While a number of GSD benefits have been widely referred to in the literature, there are also a number of less obvious benefits that can be inferred as potentially accruing from GSD. In this article, we identify the various benefits of GSD, labeling them as ‘referred’ and ‘inferred’, respectively. We provide a categorization in terms of (a) organizational, (b) team and (c) process/task. While the ‘referred’ benefits most often apply at the organizational level (e.g. cost savings, access to large multi-skilled workforces, reduced time to market and proximity to customer), the ‘inferred’ benefits apply to a greater extent at team and process/task level (e.g. task modularization, team autonomy, improved documentation and clearly defined processes). In the decision of whether or not to globalize software development activities, a categorization including both ‘referred’ and ‘inferred’ benefits will be helpful in providing a synthesis of all potential benefits associated with GSD. Copyright  2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Brian Nicholson,et al.  Some political and cultural issues in the globalisation of software development: case experience from Britain and India , 2001, Inf. Organ..

[2]  K. Subramanian,et al.  Leveraging Resources in Global Software Development , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[3]  Dale Walter Karolak Global Software Development: Managing Virtual Teams and Environments , 1999 .

[4]  Daniela E. Damian,et al.  The impact of stakeholders' geographical distribution on managing requirements in a multi-site organization , 2002, Proceedings IEEE Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering.

[5]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  The effect of time separation on coordination costs in global software teams: a dyad model , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[6]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Guest Editors' Introduction: Global Software Development , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[7]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[8]  Frédéric Adam,et al.  The status of the IS field: historical perspective and practical orientation , 2000, Information Research.

[9]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Two-Stage Offshoring: An Investigation of the Irish Bridge , 2008, MIS Q..

[10]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  Bridging Global Boundaries for IS Project Success , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[11]  Erran Carmel,et al.  Global software teams: collaborating across borders and time zones , 1999 .

[12]  Christof Ebert,et al.  Improving Validation Activities in a Global Software Development , 2000, IWSM.

[13]  Dorina C. Gumm,et al.  Distribution Dimensions in Software Development Projects: A Taxonomy , 2006, IEEE Software.

[14]  D. Boland Transitioning from a co-located to a globally-distributed software development team: a case study at Analog Devices Inc , 2004, ICSE 2004.

[15]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  The geography of coordination: dealing with distance in R&D work , 1999, GROUP.

[16]  Bill Curtis,et al.  A field study of the software design process for large systems , 1988, CACM.

[17]  Daniel Paulish Global Software Development Process Research at Siemens , 2004 .

[18]  Yoshikazu Yamamoto,et al.  Leveraging Distributed Software Development , 1999, Computer.

[19]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[20]  Christof Ebert,et al.  Surviving Global Software Development , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[21]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Object-Oriented Analysis and Design in Software Project Teams , 1995, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[22]  Alistair Cockburn,et al.  Agile Software Development: The Business of Innovation , 2001, Computer.

[23]  Nurul I Sarkar,et al.  Keynote speech I , 2011, TENCON 2011 - 2011 IEEE Region 10 Conference.

[24]  R. Davison Offshoring information technology: Sourcing and outsourcing to a global workforce , 2006, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries..

[25]  Sundeep Sahay Global software alliances: The Challenge of 'Standardization' , 2003, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[26]  D. L. Parnas,et al.  On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules , 1972, Software Pioneers.

[27]  Daniela E. Damian,et al.  Addressing the challenges of software industry globalization: the workshop on global software development , 2003, 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2003. Proceedings..

[28]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Investigating actability dimensions: a language/action perspective on criteria for information systems evaluation , 2004, Interact. Comput..

[29]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Global software development at siemens: experience from nine projects , 2005, ICSE.

[30]  M. Patton Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[31]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[32]  L. Kiel Experiences in Distributed Development: A Case Study , 2003 .

[33]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  Understanding Free/Open Source Software Development Processes , 2006, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..

[34]  Erran Carmel,et al.  Tactical Approaches for Alleviating Distance in Global Software Development , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[35]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  A framework for considering opportunities and threats in distributed software development , 2005 .

[36]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway's law revisited , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).