• No results found

OBSERVATIONS ON SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES IN SIX SOFTWARE COMPANIES

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "OBSERVATIONS ON SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES IN SIX SOFTWARE COMPANIES"

Copied!
21
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

OBSERVATIONS ON

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

PRACTICES IN SIX

SOFTWARE COMPANIES

RIGHT PROJECT –1st

Seminar, April 20th 2007

(2)

AGENDA

1 INTRODUCTION 2 COMPANIES

3 METHOD

4 RESULTS

4.1 The Identified Context

4.2 The Made Observations in six Software Companies

(3)

1 INTRODUCTION

l

This study yields how different contextual

factors affect the software development

process

l

The goal is to:

Empirically identify the contextual factors in actual work context in industry

Establish their relative importance in software development practices
(4)

2 COMPANIES

l TietoEnator Forest & Energy Oy

• Information systems for pulp, paper and wood products industry

l Savcor Forest Oy

• Wood procurement, forest & mechanical wood processing information systems

l Ardin Software Oy

• An international ICT outsourcing company

l ProAgria Oy

• The leading agricultural expert organization in Finland

l IT Optimo Oy

(5)

3 METHOD

l Theme-based interviews

The main data collection method

l Three focus groups were interviewed

Developers

Project Managers

Senior Managers

l In total, 30 interviews in 6 companies were done

l The interviews were coded and observations made.

l Based on the observations, 9 context categories and 34

(6)
(7)

4.1 RESULTS - THE IDENTIFIED

CONTEXT

Company Infrastructure Strategic Management Competence Knowledge

Transfer ManagementOperational

Business Environment Organizational Structure Organizational Culture Customer Software Development Process Contextual factors Contextual factors

(8)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

CUSTOMER

l Too tight customer orientation

The process becomes customer-driven

<= The customer dictates the software development practices used ⇒ This leads to lowering the standard of the used practices

⇒ Difficulties in following own process

l Restrictions from the customer side

Incomplete knowledge of application (business) domain

⇒ Low quality

l Customer inquires often status information of the

project/task

(9)

l Inflexible customer

Tight schedule that becomes impossible to follow

Fail in (on-time) delivery

l No foreign customer management process

Difficulties in communication

Difficulties in the (requirements) definition phase

Misunderstandings & Information loss

l Customer do not have basic understanding of software

engineering & business

Requirements not properly done

Customer requires omission of testing

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

CUSTOMER

(10)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

COMPETENCE

l

Little knowledge of customer’

s business

domain

Inability to deliver a high quality product and fit into the schedule

l

Expertise required in many different areas

Abrupt and severe shortage of expertise is often handled through partners
(11)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

l

It is hard to adapt the product quality to

market price (attitude to quality)

Prevailing attitude to quality is not easy to

change

(12)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS ON

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

l Inconsistent understanding of software engineering

practices in different levels of organization

IT development needs underestimated

Complicated software development environment

Difficulties in product development

No appropriate testing tools

Poor product quality

l Customers communicate directly with the developers

Developers end up having too many tasks simultaneously
(13)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT

l Competition for customers

⇒ Projects sold in a fixed price

⇒ Delivery price estimation problems

⇒ Overloaded resources

⇒ Tight schedule

⇒ Usage of a cost-efficient subcontractor

l Well defined processes and high quality standards lead to high quality products

⇒ Competitors get the deals by promising lower prices

l Competition for resources

⇒ High salaries as a motivator

⇒ The problem of a growing wage pattern

l Growing wages (consider your subcontractor)

⇒ Resources not loyal to a company

(14)

l Long distance

No possibility of frequent visits

l Language barrier

Loss of information

Misunderstandings

l Usage of multi-vendors

The project management must undergo many changes

New tools to manage the project

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT

(15)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS ON

OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT

l

Limited resources

No time for comprehensive testing

Multiple roles

Pressure & tight schedule

l

Tight schedule

No time for completing various project phases

Stress & Motivation problems
(16)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

l

In order to be competitive, companies

must be cost & time efficient

Overloaded & insufficient resources

Multiple roles

Motivation problems

Tight schedule

(17)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS

ON

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

l Improper or insufficient communication

Information loss

Misunderstandings

l Customers are application domain specialists

Customers want to talk with application domain terminology, not the technical jargon

l Requirement and design documents are not available

Slows down and makes harder both development and testing
(18)

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS ON

COMPANY INFRASTRUCTURE

l Incomplete definition

Difficult implementation

Schedule problems

Fail in (on-time) delivery

Stress

l Customers expect small changes do be implemented

quickly

So called maintenance work requires a lightweight and well defined approach

l Improperly selected software development tool

Lack of available resources
(19)

l No education within the project

Difficulties in involving new resources into an ongoing project

l Missing templates & guidelines

The process is not documented. No common process

No common architecture

l Inefficient change management

Lost change requests

Tight schedule

Leaves no time for testing

Results on poor quality

4.2 RESULTS –OBSERVATIONS ON

(20)

5 DISCUSSION &

CONCLUSIONS

l The identified context reveals a lot of obstacles in daily practices of software development companies

l Software development practices and issues vary a lot in

different companies

l The efficiency is defined by the context

l The process should be defined according to the context and process improvement starts from identifying the most important contextual factors and their effect

l High quality products and processes may be too expensive for customers

(21)

6 FUTURE WORK

l Describe the case companies by specific to them context

Identify the problem areas in the context

l Study the case companies in more

details according to the defined context

Look for origins of the identified problems

l Propose the improvement plan

How to get rid of the identified problems

Company Infrastructure Business Environment Customer XYZ Ltd. XYZ Ltd.

References

Related documents

For information about individual classes, objects, properties, commands, and parameters, as well as script samples that demonstrate how to use many of these items, see

The purpose of this paper is to determine the performance and efficiency of Micro Hydro Power at Panching Waterfall, to simulate the flow of upstream

Apgaulės tyrėjai ir praktikai atlieka daugybę tyrimų, siekiant nustatyti apgaulės indikatorius ir kuriant sukčiavimo prevencijos procedūras (Rai, 2017). Visgi,

Executive summary The going public decision for Canadian businesses has been a subject of great debate due to concerns about a lack of access to capital, or a higher cost of

An updated underground Mineral Resource (Table 1) has been estimated in accordance with the JORC Code (2012) and the NI 43-101 guidelines which incorporates the results of

The process of the policy-induced integration of CEECs into the EU, initiated by the EA, has already led to the emergence of a single framework for trade in industrial products

Yngve Professor of Information Science in the Department of Information and Library Science, School of Informatics and Computing, Adjunct Professor at the Department of Statistics