Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

Software project initiation and planning – an empirical study

Software project initiation and planning – an empirical study

For access to this article, please select a purchase option:

Buy article PDF
£12.50
(plus tax if applicable)
Add to cart
Buy Knowledge Pack
10 articles for £75.00
(plus taxes if applicable)
Add to cart

IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.

Learn more about IET membership 

Recommend Title Publication to library

You must fill out fields marked with: *

Librarian details
Name:*
Email:*
Your details
Name:*
Email:*
Department:*
Why are you recommending this title?
Select reason:
 
 
 
 
 
IET Software — Recommend this title to your library

Thank you

Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

  • Author(s): D. Greer 1  and  R. Conradi 2
    • View affiliations
    • Affiliations: 1: School of Electronics, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queens University Belfast, UK
      2: Department of Computer and Information Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
  • Source: Volume 3, Issue 5, October 2009, p. 356 – 368
    DOI:  10.1049/iet-sen.2008.0093 , Print ISSN 1751-8806, Online ISSN 1751-8814
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Published

This study describes a study of 14 software companies, on how they initiate and pre-plan software projects. The aim was to obtain an indication of the range of planning activities carried out. The study, using a convenience sample, was carried out using structured interviews, with questions about early software project planning activities. The study offers evidence that an iterative and incremental development process presents extra difficulties in the case of fixed-contract projects. The authors also found evidence that feasibility studies were common, but generally informal in nature. Documentation of the planning process, especially for project scoping, was variable. For incremental and iterative development projects, an upfront decision on software architecture was shown to be preferred over allowing the architecture to just ‘emerge’. There is also evidence that risk management is recognised but often performed incompletely. Finally appropriate future research arising from the study is described.

Inspec keywords: strategic planning; risk management; software development management

Other keywords: risk management; software architecture; documentation; fixed-contract projects; software project initiation; software project planning; iterative process; incremental development process

Subjects: Software management

References

    1. 1)
      • M.A. Ould . (1990) Strategies for software engineering: the management of risk and quality.
    2. 2)
      • Agile Manifesto: http://agilemanifesto.org/, accessed 18 June 2008.
    3. 3)
      • B. Fitzgerald , G. Hartnett , K. Conboy . Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. , 2 , 200 - 213
    4. 4)
      • S. McConnell . Feasibility studies. IEEE Softw. , 3 , 119 - 120
    5. 5)
      • B.W. Boehm . Value-based software engineering: reinventing. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes , 2
    6. 6)
      • L. Bass , P. Clements , R. Kazman . (2003) Software architecture in practice.
    7. 7)
      • B.W. Boehm , R. Turner . (2004) Balancing agility and discipline – a guide for the perplexed.
    8. 8)
      • D. Yeates , T. Wakefield . (2004) Systems analysis and design.
    9. 9)
      • R. Pressman . (2001) Software engineering: a practitioner's approach.
    10. 10)
      • C. Larman . (2005) Applying UML and patterns: an introduction to object-oriented analysis and design and iterative development.
    11. 11)
      • P.S. Taylor , D. Greer , G. Coleman , K. McDaid . Preparing small software companies for tailored agile method adoption: minimally intrusive risk assessment. J. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. , 5 , 421 - 437
    12. 12)
      • D.M. Ahern , A. Clouse , R. Turner . (2003) CMMI distilled: a practical introduction to integrated process improvement.
    13. 13)
      • M. Jørgensen, , M. Shepperd . A systematic review of software development cost estimation studies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. , 1 , 33 - 53
    14. 14)
      • Hanssen, G.K., Bjørnson, F.O., Westerheim, H.: `Tailoring and introduction of the rational unified process', Proc. 14th European Conf. on Software Process Improvement, 2007, Springer, p. 7–18, LNCS.
    15. 15)
      • Mølokken-Østvold, K., Furulund, K.M.: `The relationship between customer collaboration and software project overruns', Proc. Agile, 2007, p. 72–83.
    16. 16)
      • K. Beck . (2000) Extreme programming explained.
    17. 17)
      • M.C. Ohlsson , C. Wohlin , B. Regnell . A project effort estimation study. Inf. Softw. Technol. , 14 , 831 - 839
    18. 18)
      • M. Svahnberg , C. Wohlin . An investigation of a method for identifying a software architecture candidate with respect to quality attributes. J. Empir. Softw. Eng. , 2 , 149 - 181
    19. 19)
      • Basili, V.R., Rombach, H.D.: `Tailoring the software process to project goals and environments', Proc. Ninth Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, 1987, p. 345–357.
    20. 20)
      • E. Sadraei , A. Aurum , G. Beydoun , B. Paech . A field study of the requirements engineering practice in australian software industry. Requir. Eng. , 3 , 145 - 162
    21. 21)
      • C.B. Seaman . Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. , 4 , 557 - 572
    22. 22)
      • Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T.: `Agile contracts – how to develop contracts that support agile software development', Proc. Sixth Int. Conf. on Extreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering, 2005, p. 302.
    23. 23)
      • J. Li , R. Conradi , C. Bunse , M. Torchiano , O.P.N. Slyngstad , M. Morisio . Development with off-the-shelf components: 10 facts. IEEE Softw. , 2 , 80 - 87
    24. 24)
      • N. Maiden , A. Gizikis . Where do requirements come from?. IEEE Softw. , 5 , 10 - 12
    25. 25)
      • R.N. Ferrari , N.H. Madhavji . Architecting-problems rooted in requirements. Inf. Softw. Technol. , 53 - 66
    26. 26)
      • B.W. Boehm . (1989) Software risk management.
    27. 27)
      • S.L. Pfleeger , B.A. Kitchenham . Principles of survey research part 1 – turning lemons into lemonade. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes , 6 , 16 - 18
    28. 28)
      • Atlee, J.M., LeBlanc, R.J., Lethbridge, T., Sobel, A.E.K., Thompson, J.B.: `ACM/IEEE-CS guidelines for undergraduate programs in software engineering', Proc. ICSE, 2005, p. 623–624.
    29. 29)
      • Boehm, B.W., Sullivan, K.: `Software economics: a roadmap, in the future of software engineering', Proc. 22nd Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, June 2000.
    30. 30)
      • H.R. Costa , M.O. Barros , G.H. Travassos . Evaluating software project portfolio risks. J. Syst. Softw. , 1 , 16 - 31
    31. 31)
      • L. Putnam , W. Myers . How solved is the cost estimation problem. IEEE Softw. , 6 , 105 - 107
    32. 32)
      • J. Li , F.O. Bjørnson , R. Conradi , V.B. Kampenes . An empirical study of variations in COTS-based software development processes in Norwegian IT industry. J. Empir. Softw. Eng. , 3 , 433 - 461
    33. 33)
      • S. Barney , A. Aurum , C. Wohlin . A product management challenge: creating software product value through requirements selection. J. Syst. Archit. , 6 , 576 - 593
    34. 34)
      • DSDM, Feasibility Study: http://www.dsdm.org/version4/2/public/Feasibility_Study.asp, accessed 18 March 2008.
    35. 35)
      • D. Greer , G. Ruhe . Software release planning: an evolutionary and iterative approach. J. Inf. Softw. Technol. , 4 , 243 - 253
    36. 36)
      • N. Mooradian . Tacit knowledge: philosophic roots and role in KM. J. Knowl. Manage. , 6 , 104 - 113
    37. 37)
      • S. Biffl , D. Winkler , R. Höhn , H. Wetzel . Software process improvement in Europe: potential of the new V-model XT and research issues. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. , 3 , 229 - 238
    38. 38)
      • SWEBOK guide.
    39. 39)
      • L. Karlsson , B. Regnell , T. Thelin . Case studies in process improvement through retrospective analysis of release planning decisions. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. , 885 - 915
    40. 40)
      • M. Cohn . (2005) Agile estimating and planning.
    41. 41)
      • (1990) IEEE standard glossary of software engineering terminology.
    42. 42)
      • Misra, S.C.: `The organizational changes required and the challenges involved in adopting agile methodologies in traditional software development organizations', First Int. Conf. on Digital Information Management, 2006, p. 25–28.
    43. 43)
      • Norwegian Computer Society: PS2000 Standard Contract, http://www.dataforeningen.no/english-version.134112.no.html, accessed 16 September 2009.
    44. 44)
      • I. Sommerville . (2006) Software engineering.
    45. 45)
      • P. Xu , B. Ramesh . Software process tailoring: an empirical investigation. J. Manage. Inf. Syst. , 2 , 293 - 328
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2008.0093
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2008.0093
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address