skip to main content
10.1145/3302333.3302347acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesvamosConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

An Exploratory Study on Migrating Single-Products towards Product Lines in Startup Contexts

Published: 06 February 2019 Publication History

Abstract

A majority of technology startups fail; inadequate software engineering practices are known to be a contributing factor. The smooth transitioning towards software product lines in particular is a major stumbling block for startups that must broaden their product portfolio to deal with divergent demands imposed by the market. We conducted a preliminary study within two software engineering startups, which revealed the motivating factors and benefits that would lead to the migration from a single product into a product line. Despite the benefits, tackling the challenges foreseen and the identification of features and their relations in the current product is the crucial first step towards implementing an appropriate highly-configurable product portfolio.

References

[1]
Ebrahim Bagheri and Dragan Gasevic. 2011. Assessing the maintainability of software product line feature models using structural metrics. Software Quality Journal 19, 3 (2011), 579--612.
[2]
Jonatas Ferreira Bastos, Paulo Anselmo da Mota Silveira Neto, Pdraig OLeary, Eduardo Santana de Almeida, and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira. 2017. Software Product Lines Adoption in Small Organizations. J. Syst. Softw. 131, C (Sept. 2017), 112--128.
[3]
Kent Beck, Mike Beedle, Arie van Bennekum, Alistair Cockburn, Ward Cunningham, Martin Fowler, James Grenning, Jim Highsmith, Andrew Hunt, Ron Jeffries, Jon Kern, Brian Marick, Robert C. Martin, Steve Mellor, Ken Schwaber, Jeff Sutherland, and Dave Thomas. 2001. Manifesto for Agile Software Development. http://www.agilemanifesto.org/
[4]
Jan Bosch. 2002. Maturity and Evolution in Software Product Lines: Approaches, Artefacts and Organization. In Software Product Lines, Second International Conference, SPLC 2, San Diego, CA, USA, August 19-22, 2002, Proceedings. 257--271.
[5]
Cagatay Catal. 2009. Barriers to the Adoption of Software Product Line Engineering. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 34, 6 (Dec. 2009), 1--4.
[6]
Paul C. Clements and Linda Northrop. 2001. Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley.
[7]
M. Crowne. 2002. Why software product startups fail and what to do about it. Evolution of software product development in startup companies. In Engineering Management Conference, 2002. IEMC '02. 2002 IEEE International. 338--343 vol.1.
[8]
Ivonei Freitas da Silva, Paulo Anselmo da Mota Silveira Neto, Pádraig O'Leary, Eduardo Santana de Almeida, and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira. {n. d.}. Agile software product lines: a systematic mapping study. Software: Practice and Experience 41, 8 ({n. d.}), 899--920. arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/spe.1078
[9]
Ivonei Freitas da Silva, Paulo Anselmo da Mota Silveira Neto, Pádraig O'Leary, Eduardo Santana de Almeida, and Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira. 2015. Using a multi-method approach to understand Agile software product lines. Information and Software Technology 57 (2015), 527--542.
[10]
Anuradha Dande, Veli-Pekka Eloranta, Antti-Jussi Kovalainen, Timo Lehtonen, Marko Leppänen, Taru Salmimaa, Mahbubul Sayeed, Matti Vuori, Claude Rubattel, Wolfgang Weck, et al. 2014. Software Startup Patterns-An Empirical Study. Tampereen teknillinen yliopisto. Tietotekniikan laitos. Raportti-Tampere University of Technology. Department of Pervasive Computing. Report; 4 (2014).
[11]
Joanna DeFranco and Phillip Laplante. 2017. A content analysis process for qualitative software engineering research. Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering 13 (05 2017), 1--13.
[12]
Y. Dubinsky, J. Rubin, T. Berger, S. Duszynski, M. Becker, and K. Czarnecki. 2013. An Exploratory Study of Cloning in Industrial Software Product Lines. In 2013 17th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. 25--34.
[13]
Veli-Pekka Eloranta. 2014. Towards a Pattern Language for Software Startups. In Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 24, 11 pages.
[14]
Chris Exton. 2004. The role of content analysis in the development of theory and understanding of software engineering. In 12 International Workshop on Software Technology and Engineering Practice (STEP'04). 5 pp.--46.
[15]
Claudia Fritsch and Ralf Hahn. 2004. Product Line Potential Analysis. In Software Product Lines, Robert L. Nord (Ed.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 228--237.
[16]
Yaser Ghanam, Frank Maurer, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2012. Making the leap to a software platform strategy: Issues and challenges. Information and Software Technology 54, 9 (2012), 968--984.
[17]
C. Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner, N. Paternoster, T. Gorschek, and P. Abrahamsson. 2014. What Do We Know about Software Development in Startups? IEEE Software 31, 5 (Sept 2014), 28--32.
[18]
Geir K. Hanssen and Tor E. Fígri. 2008. Process Fusion: An Industrial Case Study on Agile Software Product Line Engineering. J. Syst. Softw. 81, 6 (June 2008), 843--854.
[19]
William A. Hetrick, Charles W. Krueger, and Joseph G. Moore. 2006. Incremental Return on Incremental Investment: Engenio's Transition to Software Product Line Practice. In Companion to the 21st ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Object-oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA '06). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 798--804.
[20]
M. Kircher, C. Schwanninger, and I. Groher. 2006. Transitioning to a software product family approach - challenges and best practices. In Software Product Line Conference, 2006 10th International. 9 pp.--171.
[21]
Peter Knauber, Dirk Muthig, Klaus Schmid, and Tanya Widen. 2000. Applying Product Line Concepts in Small and Medium-Sized Companies. IEEE Software 17, 5 (2000), 88--95.
[22]
C. W. Krueger. 2006. New methods in software product line development. In 10th International Software Product Line Conference (SPLC'06). 95--99.
[23]
Yang Li, Sandro Schulze, and Gunter Saake. 2017. Reverse Engineering Variability from Natural Language Documents: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the 21st International Systems and Software Product Line Conference - Volume A (SPLC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 133--142.
[24]
Najam Nazar and T M. J. Rakotomahefa. 2016. Analysis of a Small Company for Software Product Line Adoption --- An Industrial Case Study. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering 8 (08 2016), 313--322.
[25]
Jarley Palmeira Nóbrega, Eduardo Santana De Almeida, and Sílvio Romero Lemos. 2006. A cost framework specification for software product lines scenarios. 6th Workshop on Component--Based Development (2006).
[26]
Nicolo Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, Michael Unterkalmsteiner, Tony Gorschek, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2014. Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study. 56, 10 (2014), 1200--1218.
[27]
L. Rincón, R. Mazo, and C. Salinesi. 2018. APPLIES: A framework for evaluAting organization's motivation and preparation for adopting product lines. In 2018 12th International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS). 1--12.
[28]
C. Riva and C. Del Rosso. 2003. Experiences with software product family evolution. In Sixth International Workshop on Principles of Software Evolution, 2003. Proceedings. 161--169.
[29]
Per Runeson and Martin Höst. 2009. Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Case Study Research in Software Engineering. Empirical Softw. Engg. 14, 2 (April 2009), 131--164.
[30]
Forrest Shull, Janice Singer, and Dag I.K. Sjøberg. 2007. Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[31]
Henri Terho, Sampo Suonsyrjä, and Kari Systä. 2016. The Developers Dilemma: Perfect Product Development or Fast Business Validation?. In Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, Pekka Abrahamsson, Andreas Jedlitschka, Anh Nguyen Duc, Michael Felderer, Sousuke Amasaki, and Tommi Mikkonen (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 571--579.
[32]
Michael Unterkalmsteiner, Pekka Abrahamsson, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc, Syed M. Ali Shah, Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Guido H. Baltes, Kieran Conboy, Eoin Cullina, Denis Dennehy, Henry Edison, Carlos Fernández-Sánchez, Juan Garbajosa, Tony Gorschek, Eriks Klotins, Laura Hokkanen, Fabio Kon, Ilaria Lunesu, Michele Marchesi, Lorraine Morgan, Markku Oivo, Christoph Selig, Pertti Seppänen, Roger Sweetman, Pasi Tyrväinen, Christina Ungerer, and Agustín Yagüe. 2016. Software Startups - A Research Agenda. e-Informatica 10, 1 (2016), 89--124.
[33]
Muhammad Waseem and Naveed Ikram. 2016. Architecting Activities Evolution and Emergence in Agile Software Development: An Empirical Investigation - Initial Research Proposal. In Agile Processes, in Software Engineering, and Extreme Programming - 17th International Conference, XP 2016, Edinburgh, UK, May 24-27, 2016, Proceedings. 326--332.
[34]
Alex Yau and Christian Murphy. 2013. Is a Rigorous Agile Methodology the Best Development Strategy for Small Scale Tech Startups? Technical Report MS-CIS-13-01. Penn Engineering. http://repository.upenn.edu/cis_reports/980

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Product line adoption in industryProceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Systems and Software Product Line: Volume A - Volume A10.1145/3382025.3414953(1-11)Online publication date: 19-Oct-2020
  • (2019)Architecting for scaleProceedings of the 13th European Conference on Software Architecture - Volume 210.1145/3344948.3344950(55-58)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2019

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
VaMoS '19: Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems
February 2019
116 pages
ISBN:9781450366489
DOI:10.1145/3302333
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]

In-Cooperation

  • FWO: Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders (Belgium)
  • FNRS: Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 February 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Exploratory Study
  2. Feature Identification
  3. Software Product Lines
  4. Startups
  5. Transition

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

VAMOS '19

Acceptance Rates

VaMoS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 14 of 24 submissions, 58%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 66 of 147 submissions, 45%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2020)Product line adoption in industryProceedings of the 24th ACM Conference on Systems and Software Product Line: Volume A - Volume A10.1145/3382025.3414953(1-11)Online publication date: 19-Oct-2020
  • (2019)Architecting for scaleProceedings of the 13th European Conference on Software Architecture - Volume 210.1145/3344948.3344950(55-58)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2019

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