Abstract
Many organizations struggle with efficient architecture decision-making approaches. Often, the decision-making approaches are not articulated or understood. This problem is particularly evident in large, globally distributed organizations with multiple large products and systems. The significant architecture decisions of a system are a critical organization knowledge asset, as well as a determinant of success. However, the environment in which decisions get made, recorded, and followed-up on often confounds rather than helps articulation and execution of architecture decisions. This paper looks at aspects of architecture decision-making, drawing from an industry-based case study. The data represents findings from a qualitative case study involving a survey and three focus groups across multiple organizations in a global technology company. Architects in this organization are responsible for multiple products and systems, where individual products can include up to 50+ teams. The impact is not just on others in the system; architecture decisions also impact other decisions and other architects. The findings suggest recommendations for organizations to improve how they make and manage architecture decisions. In particular, this paper notes the relevance of group decision-making, decision scope, and social factors such as trust in effective architecture decision-making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River (2013)
Rozanski, N., Woods, E.: Software Systems Architecture: Working with Stakeholders Using Viewpoints and Perspectives. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River (2012)
Kruchten, P., Capilla, R., Dueñas, J.C.: The decision view’s role in software architecture practice. IEEE Softw. 26, 36–42 (2009)
Kruchten, P., Lago, P., van Vliet, H.: Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. In: Hofmeister, C., Crnkovic, I., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4214, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11921998_8
Jansen, A., Bosch, J.: Software architecture as a set of architectural design decisions. In: 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, WICSA 2005, pp. 109–120. IEEE (2005)
Tyree, J., Akerman, A.: Architecture Decisions: Demystifying Architecture. IEEE Softw. (2005)
Clements, P., Ivers, J., Little, R., Nord, R., Stafford, J.: Documenting Software Architectures in an Agile World. Software Engineering Institute (2003)
Klein, G.A.: Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. MIT Press, Cambridge (2017)
Rekha, V.S., Muccini, H.: Suitability of software architecture decision making methods for group decisions. In: Avgeriou, P., Zdun, U. (eds.) ECSA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8627, pp. 17–32. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09970-5_2
Tofan, D., Galster, M., Avgeriou, P.: Difficulty of architectural decisions – a survey with professional architects. In: Drira, K. (ed.) ECSA 2013. LNCS, vol. 7957, pp. 192–199. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39031-9_17
Dasanayake, S., Markkula, J., Aaramaa, S., Oivo, M.: Software architecture decision-making practices and challenges: an industrial case study. In: 24th Australasian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC), pp. 88–97. IEEE (2015)
Kruchten, P.: Documentation of software architecture from a knowledge management perspective – design representation. In: Ali Babar, M., Dingsøyr, T., Lago, P., van Vliet, H. (eds.) Software Architecture Knowledge Management, pp. 39–57. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02374-3_3
Miesbauer, C., Weinreich, R.: Classification of design decisions – an expert survey in practice. In: Drira, K. (ed.) ECSA 2013. LNCS, vol. 7957, pp. 130–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39031-9_12
Maxwell, J.A.: Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (2013)
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., Saldana, J.: Qualitative data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2014)
Runeson, P., Höst, M., Rainer, A., Regnell, B.: Case Study Research in Software Engineering: Guidelines and Examples. Wiley, Hoboken (2012)
Runeson, P., Höst, M.: Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empir. Softw. Eng. 14, 131–164 (2008)
Kohn, L.T.: Methods in Case Study Analysis. Technical Publication, Center for Studying Health System Change (1997)
Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edn. SAGE, London (2014)
Morgan, D.L.: Focus Groups as Qualitative Reearch. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1997)
Yin, R.K.: Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. The Guildford Press, New York (2016)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Power, K., Wirfs-Brock, R. (2018). Understanding Architecture Decisions in Context. In: Cuesta, C., Garlan, D., Pérez, J. (eds) Software Architecture. ECSA 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11048. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00761-4_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00761-4_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-00760-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-00761-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)