Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Challenges and industry practices for managing software variability in small and medium sized enterprises

  • Published:
Empirical Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software variability is an ability to change (configure, customize, extend) software artefacts (e.g. code, product, domain requirements, models, design, documentation, test cases) for a specific context. Optimized variability management can lead a software company to 1) shorter development lead time, 2) improved customer and improved user satisfaction, 3) reduced complexity of product management (more variability, same $) and 4) reduced costs (same variability, less $). However, it is not easy for software companies, especially small and medium size of enterprises to deal with variability. In this paper we present variability challenges and used practices collected from five SMEs. Our study indicates that increased product complexity can lead growing SMEs to the time-consuming decision-making. Many of the analyzed medium size of companies also expect improved tool support to help them to boost their productivity when managing increasingly complex products and increasing amount of variants In fact, in many of the analysed SMEs, a high level of automation in design, release management and testing are or become a key factor for market success By introducing the challenges and used practices related to variability the paper deepens understanding of this highly relevant but relatively under-researched phenomenon and contributes to the literature on software product line engineering.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/facts-figures-analysis/sme-definition/index_en.htm

  2. http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=3123

  3. In this paper we are using US definition of the SMEs.

References

  • Ali Babar M, Chen L, Shull F (2010) Managing variability in software product lines. IEEE Softw 27(3):89–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asikainen T, Mannisto T, Soininen T (2007) Kumbang: A domain ontology for modelling variability in software product families. Adv Eng Inform 21(1):23–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann F, Clements PC (2005) Variability in software product lines. SEI CMU, Pittsburgh, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2005-TR-012

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosch J (2006) The challenges of broadening the scope of software product families the challenges of broading the cope of software product families. Commun ACM 49(12):41–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosch J, Florijn G, Greefhorst D, Kuusela J, Obbink H, Pohl K (2001) Variability issues in software product lines. In: van def Linden F (ed) Fourth International Workshop on Product Family Engineering (PFE-4). Springer-Verlag, Bilbao, pp 13–21

  • Chen L, Ali Babar M (2010) Variability management in software product lines: an investigation of contenporary industrial challenges. Proceeding SPLC'10 Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Software product lines

  • Chen L, Ali Babar M (2011) A systematic review of evaluation of variability management approaches in software product lines. Inf Softw Technol 53: 344–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements P, Northrop L (2001) Software product lines. Addison-Wesley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Codenie W, Gonzalez-Deleito N, Deleu J, Blagojevic V, Kuvaja P, Similä J (2010) Managing flexibility and variability: a road to competitive advantage. In: Kang K, Sugumaran V, Park S (eds) Applied software product line engineering. CRC Press, New York, pp 269–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 14(4):532–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME (2007) Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Acad Manag J 50(1):25–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fillis I (2001) Small firm internationalisation: an investigative survey and future research directions. Manag Decis 39(9):767–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galster M, Avgeriou P (2011) Handling variability in software architecture: problems and implications. Proceedings of the ninth working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture pp 171–180

  • Groves L, Nickson R, Reeve G, Reeves S, Utting M (2000) A survey of software development practices in New Zeland software industry. Aswec (Australian Software Engineering Conference) 00, pp 189–202

  • Gurp J, Bosch J, Svahnberg M (2001) On the notion of variability in software product lines. Proc Work IEEE/IFIP Conf Softw Archit 2001:45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallsteinsen S, Hinchey M, Park S, Schmid K (2008) Dyn Softw Prod Lines Comput 2008:93–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Halmans G, Pohl K (2003) Communicating the variability of a software-product family to customers. Softw Syst Model 2(1):15–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Info-Tech (2004) Stage 7 >build a strategic decision making framework. In: Strategic IT planning and governance, info-tech research group (www.infotech.com)

  • Jaejoon L, Kotonya G, Robinson D (2012) Engineering service-based dynamic software product lines. IEEE Comput 45(10):49–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamsties E, Hörmann K, Schlich M (1998) Requirements engineering in small and medium enterprises. Requir Eng 3(2):84–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlström D, Runeson P (2006) Integrating agile software development into stage-gate managed product development. Empir Softw Eng 11(2):203–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim KS, Knotts TL, Jones SC (2008) Characterizing viability of small manufacturing enterprises (SME) in the market. Expert Syst Appl 34(2008):128–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratochvíl M, Carson C (2005) Growing modular: mass customization of complex products, services and software. Springer

  • Krueger C (2001) Variation management for software production lines. In: Chastek G (Ed) SPLC2 2002, LNCS 2379, pp 37–48

  • Krueger C (2002) Eliminating the adoption barrier. IEEE Softw 19(4):29–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laporte CY, Alexandre S, O’Connor RV (2008) A software engineering lifecycle standard for very small enterprises. Proceedings of the 15th European Software Process Improvement Conference, EuroSPI 2008. EuroSPI 2008, Dublin, pp 129–141. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85936-9_12

    Google Scholar 

  • Manolova T, Brush C, Edelman L, Greene P (2002) Internationalization of small firms: personal factors revisited. Int Small Bus J 20(1):9–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metha A, Heineman GT (2002) Evolving legacy system features into fine grained components. ICSE 2002:417–427

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohagheghi P, Conradi R (2007) Quality, productivity and economic benefits of software reuse: a review of industrial studies. Empir Softw Eng 12(5):471–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mtigwe B (2005) The entrepreneurial firm internationalization process in the Southern African context: a comparative approach. Int J Entrep Behav Res 11(5):358–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikula U, Sajaniemi J, Kälviäinen H (2000) A state-of-the-practice survey on requirements engineering in small- and medium-sized enterprises, research report 1. Telecom Business Research Center, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, 20 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Northrop L (2010) Maximizing the investment from your software product portfolio. Software Engineering Institute. Available at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohl K, Böckle G, van der Linden F (2005) Software product-line engineering—foundations. Principles and Techniques, Springer

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rech J, Bogner C, Haas V (2007) Using wikis to tackle reuse in software projects. IEEE Softw 24(6):99–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhartz-Berger I, Sturm A (2009) Utilizing domain models for application design and validation. Inf Softw Technol 51:1275–1289

    Google Scholar 

  • Runeson P, Höst M (2009) Guidelines for conducting and reporting case studies in software engineering. Empir Softw Eng 14:131–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stallinger F, Neumann R, Schossleitner R, Stephan Kriener S (2011) Migrating towards evolving software product lines: challenges of an SME in a core customer-driven industrial systems engineering context. Proceedings of PLEASE’11, May 22–23, 2011, Waikiki, Honolulu, pp. 20–24

  • Svahnberg M, van Gurp J, Bosch A (2005) A taxonomy of variability realization techniques. Softw Pract Experience 35(8):705–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thörn C (2010) Current state and potential of variability management practices in software-intensive SMEs: results from a regional survey. Inf Softw Technol 52:411–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Linden FJ, Schmid K, Rommes E (2007) Software product lines in action. Springer, Berlin, 333 p

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Verlage M, Kiesgen T (2005) Five years of product engineering in small company, ICSE, pp 534–543

  • Yin RK (2002) Case study research design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking under grant agreement n° 295397 and from Tekes (the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation) and IWT.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, P.O. BOX 1100, 90571, Oulu, Finland

    Tuomas Ihme, Minna Pikkarainen, Susanna Teppola & Jukka Kääriäinen

  2. Sirris, The Collective Centre of the Belgian Technological Industry, Diamant Building, Boulevard A. Reyerslaan 80, 1030, Brussels, Belgium

    Olivier Biot

Authors
  1. Tuomas Ihme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Minna Pikkarainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Susanna Teppola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jukka Kääriäinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Olivier Biot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minna Pikkarainen.

Additional information

Communicated by: Dieter Rombach

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ihme, T., Pikkarainen, M., Teppola, S. et al. Challenges and industry practices for managing software variability in small and medium sized enterprises. Empir Software Eng 19, 1144–1168 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-013-9253-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-013-9253-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation