Abstract
In this article, we report from a 22-months long action research study in which we evaluate the usefulness of a set of software development tools in an industrial setting, a small software company. We focus on how developers in the industry use and adopt these tools, what expectations they have on them, how the tools can be improved, and how the adoption process itself can be improved. We describe these change processes from a methodological perspective, how we monitored the processes, how we reviewed the outcomes, and the strategies that we applied. We show how the processes evolved, intermediate results, and the steps that were taken along the way based on the outcomes. We believe that the described study may inspire other tool-developers and/or researchers to organize similar studies to further our understanding of the complex processes involved in the adoption of software development tools in industry.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamsson, P.: Is management commitment a necessity after all in software process improvement?. In: Proceedings of the 26th Euromicro Conference 2, 246–253 (2000)
Abrahamsson, P.: Rethinking the concept of commitment in software process improvement. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 13, 69–98 (2001)
Arts, T., Hughes, J., Johansson, J., Wiger, U.: Testing telecoms software with Quviq QuickCheck, pp. 2–10 (2006)
Barki, H., Hartwick, J.: Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 18(1), 59–79 (1994)
Baronas, A.M.K., Louis, M.R.: Restoring a sense of control during implementation: How user involvement leads to system acceptance. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 12(1), 111–123 (1988)
Bartunek, J., Louis, M.R.: Qualitative research methods. In: Insider/outsider Team Research. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (1996)
Baskerville, R.L., Wood-Harper, A.T.: A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. J. Inf. Technol. 11(3), 235–246 (1996)
Beath, C.M.: Supporting the information technology champion. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 15(3), 355–370 (1991)
Castro, D., Gulías, V.M., Benac-Earle, C., Fredlund, L., Rivas, S.: A case study on verifying a supervisor component using McErlang. Electron. Notes Theo. Comput. Sci. 271, 23–40 (2011)
Claessen, K., Hughes, J.: QuickCheck: A lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programs. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming, pp. 268–279 (2000)
Coghlan, D., Brannick, T.: Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2001)
Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D.K.: Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Revolution in Change. Berrett-Koehler Series. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco (2005)
Cooperrider, D.L., Whitney, D.K., Stavros, J.M.: Appreciative Inquiry Handbook: The First in a Series of AI Workbooks for Leaders of Change. Berrett-Koehler Series, Lakeshore Communications (2003)
Damm, L., Lundberg, L., Wohlin, C.: Faults-slip-through-a concept for measuring the efficiency of the test process. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 11, 47–59 (2006)
Dawson, P.: Organisational Change: A Processual Approach. Athenaeum Press Ltd., Newcastle (1994)
Dawson, P.: In at the deep end: conducting processual research on organisational change. Scand. J. Manag. 13(4), 389–405 (1997)
Fichman, R.G., Kemerer, C.F.: The illusory diffusion of innovation: an examination of assimilation gaps. Inf. Syst. Res. 10, 255–275 (1999)
Fredlund, L., Svensson, H.: McErlang: a model checker for a distributed functional programming language. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 42(9), 125–136 (2007)
Gable, G.G.: Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in information systems. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 3, 112–126 (1994)
Geras, A., Smith, M., Miller, J.: A prototype empirical evaluation of test driven, development, pp. 405–416 (2004)
Ginzberg, M.J.: Early diagnosis of mis implementation failure: promising results and unanswered questions. Manag. Sci. 27(4), 459–478 (1981)
Ginzberg, M.J.: Key recurrent issues in the MIS implementation process. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 5(2), 47–59 (1981)
Hardgrave, B.C., Davis, F.D., Riemenschneider, C.K.: Investigating determinants of software developers’ intentions to follow methodologies. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 20(1), 123–151 (2003)
Hughes, J.: 9th International Symposium QuickCheck Testing for Fun and Profit, Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4354, pp. 1–32. Springer, Berlin (2007)
Jacky, J.M.F., Estublier, J., Sanlaville, R.: Tool adoption issues in a very large software company. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on AdoptionCentric Software Engineering 9, 81–89 (2003)
Janzen, D., Saiedian, H.: Test-driven development: concepts, taxonomy, and future direction. Computer 38(9), 43–50 (2005)
Jarvenpaa, S.L., Ives, B.: Executive involvement and participation in the management of information technology. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 15(2), 205–223 (1991)
Lui, K.M., Chan, K.C.C.: Test Driven Development and Software Process Improvement in China. Proceedings of the International Conference on Extreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3092, Springer, pp. 219–222 (2004)
Kotter, J.P.: Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harv. Business Rev. 85(1), 96–103 (2007)
Kwon, T.H., Zmud, R.W.: Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation. Wiley, New York (1987)
Langley, A.: Strategies for theorizing from process data. Acad. Manag. Rev. 24(4), 691–710 (1999)
Li, H., Thompson, S.: Tool support for refactoring functional programs, pp. 199–203 (2008)
Marchenko, A., Abrahamsson, P., Ihme, T.: Long-term effects of test-driven development: a case study. In: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 31, 13–22 (2009)
Mathiassen, L.: Collaborative practice research. Inf. Technol. People 15(4), 321–345 (2002)
Melis, M., Turnu, I., Cau, A., Concas, G.: Evaluating the impact of test-first programming and pair programming through software process simulation. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 11(4), 345–360 (2006)
Mohr, L.B.: Explaining Organizational Behavior: The Limits and Possibilities of Theory and Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1982)
Nandhakumar, J., Rossi, M., Talvinen, J.: The dynamics of contextual forces of ERP implementation. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 14(2), 221–242 (2005)
Oram, A., Wilson, G.: Making software : what really works, and why we believe it. O’Reilly Media Inc, Sebastopol (2010)
Patton, M.Q.: How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. CSE Program Evaluation Kit. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (1987)
Pettigrew, A.M.: What is a processual analysis? Scand. J. Manag. 13(4), 337–348 (1997)
Pettigrew, A.M., Woodman, R.W., Cameron, K.S.: Studying organizational change and development: challenges for future research. Acad. Manag. J. 44(4), 697–713 (2001)
Prescott, M.B., Conger, S.A.: Information technology innovations: a classification by IT locus of impact and research approach. Data Base Adv. Inf. Syst. 26, 20–41 (1995)
Property-based Testing for Erlang (Seventh Framework Programme), http://www.protest-project.eu (2007)
Riemenschneider, C.K., Hardgrave, B.C., Davis, F.D.: Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 28(12), 1135–1145 (2002)
Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New York (2003)
Runeson, P., Höst, M.: Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empir. Softw. Eng. 14(2), 131–164 (2009)
Senapathi, M.: Adoption of Software Engineering Process Innovations: The Case of Agile Software Development Methodologies. Proceedings of the International Conference on Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming. In: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 48, pp. 226–231 Springer, Berlin (2010)
Sultan, F., Chan, L.: The adoption of new technology: the case of object-oriented computing in software companies. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 47(1), 106–126 (2000)
Susman, G.I., Evered, R.D.: An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Adm. Sci. Q. 23(4), 582–603 (1978)
Umarji, M., Seaman, C.: Predicting acceptance of software process improvement. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 30, 1–6 (2005)
Vincent S., L., Mahapatra, R.K.: Exploring the research in information technology implementation. Inf. Manag. 32(4), 187–201 (1997)
Weinberg, G.M.: Quality software management: anticipating change. In: Quality Software Management. Dorset House Publishing, New York (1997)
Yin, R.K.: Case study research : design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (1994)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research has been partially supported by EU FP7 Collaborative Project ProTest Grant Number 215868, and MICIN TIN201020959.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nilsson, A., Castro, L.M., Rivas, S. et al. Assessing the effects of introducing a new software development process: a methodological description. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer 17, 1–16 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-013-0275-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10009-013-0275-0