skip to main content
10.1145/1414004.1414027acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesesemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Why do programmers avoid metrics?

Published: 09 October 2008 Publication History

Abstract

Software process improvement initiatives such as metrics programs have a high failure rate during their assimilation in a software organization. Social and organizational issues are some of the factors affecting the adoption and acceptance of metrics, and these issues have not been discussed in detail in existing metrics literature. We undertook an interview-based study with the purpose of studying factors that influence the buy-in of metrics. We interviewed 12 members of the metrics team of a large multi-national corporation, with a thriving metrics program. We found that there was some resistance to standardization of corporate metrics processes introduced by the metrics team. This resistance centered on the metrics data collection and reporting processes. One cause of resistance was the presence of sub-cultures and native data collection and reporting processes within organizational units that were independent businesses before they were acquired. Some of the pushback manifested itself through begrudging compliance, and avoidance activities like scripting and gaming of metrics. In this paper, we present the perspectives of developers, managers and upper-level management to emphasize that each stakeholder in the metrics initiative has a valid viewpoint that should be taken into account while implementing a metrics program and that each metrics effort is inextricably enmeshed with the organizational context. We provide actionable recommendations to understand the different perspectives and to adapt the metrics effort accordingly.

References

[1]
V. R. Basili and H. D. Rombach, The tame project : Towards improvement-oriented software environments. College Park, Md.: University of Maryland, 1988.
[2]
M. C. Paulk, Capability maturity model for software. Pittsburgh, Pa.: Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute, 1991.
[3]
A. Gopal, M. S. Krishnan, T. Mukhopadhyay, and D. R. Goldenson, "Measurement programs in software development: Determinants of success," IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 28, pp. 863--875, 2002.
[4]
T. Hall and N. Fenton, "Implementing effective software metrics programs," IEEE Softw., vol. 14, pp. 55--65, 1997.
[5]
J. D. Herbsleb and R. E. Grinter, "Conceptual simplicity meets organizational complexity: Case study of a corporate metrics program," in Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Software engineering. Kyoto, Japan: IEEE Computer Society, 1998.
[6]
S. L. Pfleeger, "Lessons learned in building a corporate metrics program," IEEE Softw., vol. 10, pp. 67--74, 1993.
[7]
G. M. Weinberg, Quality software management, vol. 4. New York: Dorset House Publishing, 1997.
[8]
C. A. Dekkers, "The secrets of highly successful measurement programs," Cutter IT Journal, vol. 12, pp. 29--35, 1999.
[9]
J. Iversen and L. Mathiassen, "Lessons from implementing a software metrics program," in Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - Volume 7 - Volume 7: IEEE Computer Society, 2000.
[10]
D. J. Paulish and A. D. Carleton, "Case studies of software-process-improvement measurement," Computer, vol. 27, pp. 50--57, 1994.
[11]
C. B. Seaman, "Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering," IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., vol. 25, pp. 557--572, 1999.
[12]
A. L. Strauss and J. M. Corbin, Basics of qualitative research : Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998.
[13]
R. K. Yin, Case study research : Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1994.
[14]
M. Umarji and H. Emurian, "Acceptance issues in metrics program implementation," in Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS'05) - Volume 00: IEEE Computer Society, 2005.
[15]
V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, "A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies," Manage. Sci., vol. 46, pp. 186--204, 2000.
[16]
G. H. Hofstede, Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 2001.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ESEM '08: Proceedings of the Second ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement
October 2008
374 pages
ISBN:9781595939715
DOI:10.1145/1414004
  • General Chair:
  • Dieter Rombach,
  • Program Chairs:
  • Sebastian Elbaum,
  • Jürgen Münch
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 09 October 2008

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. code review
  2. in-process metrics
  3. phase containment
  4. quality
  5. software metrics
  6. static analysis
  7. unit testing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

ESEM '08
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 130 of 594 submissions, 22%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 27 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Évaluations heuristiques pour les décisions en matière d’accessibilité : revue systématique de la littératureRevista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/informatique/evaluations-heuristiques(107-153)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Heuristic evaluations for accessibility decisions: a systematic literature reviewRevista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/computer-science/heuristic-evaluations(107-153)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Evaluaciones heurísticas para decisiones de accesibilidad: una revisión sistemática de la literaturaRevista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/ciencias-de-la-computacion/evaluaciones-heuristicas(107-153)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
  • (2023)Avaliações heurísticas para decisões de acessibilidade: uma revisão sistemática da literaturaRevista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento10.32749/nucleodoconhecimento.com.br/ciencia-da-computacao/avaliacoes-heuristicas(107-153)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
  • (2022)Measuring Software Development Project PerformanceResearch Anthology on Agile Software, Software Development, and Testing10.4018/978-1-6684-3702-5.ch067(1385-1415)Online publication date: 2022
  • (2019)Measuring Software Development Project PerformanceAgile Approaches for Successfully Managing and Executing Projects in the Fourth Industrial Revolution10.4018/978-1-5225-7865-9.ch017(315-345)Online publication date: 2019
  • (2019)How has SPI changed in times of agile development? Results from a multi‐method studyJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.218231:11Online publication date: 15-Nov-2019
  • (2016)How Does Software Process Improvement Address Global Software Engineering?2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)10.1109/ICGSE.2016.10(89-98)Online publication date: Aug-2016
  • (2013)Towards a catalog of Object-Oriented Software Maintainability metrics2013 4th International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software Metrics (WETSoM)10.1109/WETSoM.2013.6619342(84-87)Online publication date: May-2013
  • (2011)EvoJavaProceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Australasian Computer Science Conference - Volume 11310.5555/2459296.2459310(117-126)Online publication date: 17-Jan-2011
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media