2010 icgse - challenges and solutions in distributed software development project management: a...
DESCRIPTION
Challenges and Solutions in Distributed Software Development Project Management: a Systematic Literature Review Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Catarina Costa, A. César C. França, Rafael Prikladinicki Abstract-This paper presents a systematic literature review of the challenges, best practices, models, and tools in Distributed Software Development (DSD) Project Management. The objective is to collect and systematize reported knowledge in terms of what are the difficulties in managing DSD projects, what are the best practices to overcome these difficulties, and how existing models and tools support these practices. We found 54 works related to DSD project management, published between 1998 and 2009. Using the data systematically extracted from these works, we propose an evidence-based DSD project management improvement model. Our contention is that this model can support practitioners and researchers to better understand the landscape of DSD project challenges and devise more effective solutions to improve project management in a distributed setting. Paper presented at Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, Staffordshire, UK, 2010. http://www.haseresearch.comTRANSCRIPT
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Systematic Literature Review
Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Systematic Literature Review
Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: A Mapping Study
Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: A (preliminary) Mapping Study
Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Motivation
• Management of distributed software development projects has more challenges than traditional (co-located) development.– Which ones?
– Human (individual or social) factors?
• However, most organizations still manage distributed projects using the same tools used in traditional projects.– Really?
• There is no mapping study about the use of models and tools to support management in DSD projects.
5
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Research Questions
• RQ1 – What are the existing models for managing distributed software development?
• RQ2 – What are the existing tools which support management activities on distributed software development?
6
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Search Strings
• The PIO structure– Population: Distributed Software Development– Intervention: tools, models– Outcome: project management
• Synonyms and connectors:– (“Distributed software development” OR “Global software
development” OR “Collaborative software development” OR “Global software engineering” OR “Globally distributed work” OR “Collaborative software engineering” OR “Distributed development” OR “Distributed teams” OR “Global software teams” OR “Globally distributed development” OR “Geographically distributed software development” OR “Offshore software development” OR Offshoring OR Offshore OR “Offshore outsourcing” OR “Dispersed teams”) AND(Model* OR Process* OR Framework* OR Method* OR Technique* OR Methodolog* OR Tool* OR Software* OR Program* OR System*) AND(“Project Management”)
7
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Sources
• IEEEXplore Digital Library
• ACM Digital Library
• ScienceDirect
• EI Compendex
• ICGSE 2009
– whose papers were not available on the IEEEXplore at the time the initial search was performed.
8
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
• Inclusion:
– Reported tools and models for management ofdistributed software development projects
• Exclusion:
– Did not answer any of the two research questions
– Duplicated (select the most complete or recent)
– Not finished or incomplete.
9
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Selection Process
10
Step 1
Two researchers performed the search to identify
potentially relevant studies, based on reading titles
and excluding those papers which were clearly not
relevant.
Step 2The two lists (one from each researcher) were
merged.
Step 3
Studies on the resulting list were evaluated according
to the selection criteria, by reading abstract and
conclusion, and creating a final list of relevant
studies.
Step 4The data was extracted from reading the entire
content of the studies on the final list.
Similar to Tore Dybå et al. ESEM 2007.
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Quality Assessment
• Each study in the final list was assessed for its quality using ten criteria.
• Two researches provided scores for each criterion using a Likert-5 scale, varying from 4 (study fits the criterion completely) to 0 (study does not fit the criterion).
• Discrepancies above 5% in the final score were discussed and expert opinion was sought whenever necessary to reach an agreement.
11
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Data Analysis and Synthesis
• JabRef was used to support data extraction.
• Qualitative analysis was used to systematicallyextract data:
– Selective coding: to identify pieces of similar textual data
– Axial coding: to categorize and combining coded text
– Selective coding: to synthesize results (not presented here)
12
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Results
13
So
urc
e
Se
arc
h
Resu
lts
Po
ten
tia
lly
Rele
van
t
No
tR
ele
van
t
Rep
eate
d
Inc
om
ple
te
Rele
van
t
Stu
die
s
IEEEXplore 100 51 31 0 5 15
ACM 253 33 30 0 1 2
ScienceDirect 100 11 8 0 0 3
EI Compendex 350 19 9 8 0 2
ICGSE2009 64 41 34 0 4 3
TOTAL 867 155 112 8 10 25
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Results
14
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Number of Studies per Year of Publication
First year of ICGSE
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Results
15
Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent
<26% 26%-45% 46%-65% 66%-85% >86%
# of Studies 0 0 4 13 7
% 0% 0% 17% 54% 30%
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models
16
ModelsEvidence
# (quality)M1. Approach to Offshore Collaboration 1 (1E)
M2. Conceptual Model for Managing an International IS Development Project 1 (1E)
M3. Solar System 1 (1E)
M4. Framework for Supporting Management in Distributed Information Systems Development 1 (1VG)
M5. TAPER 1 (1VG)
M6. Process Maturity Framework for Managing Distributed Development 1 (1VG)
M7. Project Management Model 1 (1VG)
M8. Project Management Framework 1 (1VG)
M9: NEXTMOVE 1 (1VG)
M10. Framework to Enable Coordination in Distributed Software Development 1 (1G)
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Tools
17
Tools (T1-T24)Evidence
# (quality)T
RA
DIT
ION
AL
T1. E-mail 17 (10E, 6VG, 1G)
T2. Videoconference 14 (8E, 5VG, 1G)
T3. Messenger or chat 11 (7E, 4VG)
T5. Teleconference 8 (7E, 1VG)
T4. Phone 9 (6E, 3VG)
T6. Wiki 7 (4E, 3VG)
T7. Audio conference 5 (3E, 2VG)
T8. NetMeeting 4 (3E, 1VG)
T10. Virtual whiteboards 4 (2E, 2VG)
T9. Change management system 4 (2E, 1VG, 1G)
T11. Photo gallery 3 (1E, 2VG)
T13. Monitoring and Management 2 (2E)
T15. Fax 2 (2E)
T12. Team Intranet websites 3 (1E, 2VG)
T16. Electronic meeting systems 2 (1E, 1VG)
T14. Group calendars 2 (1E, 1VG)
T18. Blog 1 (1E)
T19. Lessons leaened databases 1 (1E)
T17. PowerPoint presentations 1 (1E)
T20. Voicemail 1 (VG)
SP
EC
IFIC
T21. CAMEL 1 (VG)
T22. NEXTMOVE 1 (VG)
T23. TAMRI 1 (VG)
T24. TeamSpace 1 (VG)
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Conclusions
• The reported works are relatively recent – 2002 ...
• There are few specific tools– 4/24 – 17%
• Models and specific tools have not been (extensively?) tested– The only evidence are from the proposers
• Is the literature in the field mature enough for a systematic review?
18
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Future Work
• This is part of a wider project ...
• ... that ultimately tries to understand theeffect of human factors on DSD.
19
(RQ1)
Challenges of
project management in
DSD.
(RQ2)
Best Practices
used to overcome
challenges.
(RQ3)
Tools that
support practices or
challenges.
(RQ4) Models or frameworks for DSD, possibly supported by tools, that
addresses challenges or support the use of best practices.
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Preliminary Mapping Study
Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki
Thank you!
S
O
P
E
I
Infl
uen
ces
Is influenced
Challenges and Solutions in Distributed Software Development Project Management: a Systematic Literature Review by Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Catarina Costa, A. César C. França, Rafael Prikladinicki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, Staffordshire, UK, 2010.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.haseresearch.com