skip to main content
10.1145/3530019.3531331acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageseaseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Influence of Cost Drivers on Effort Estimation in Distributed Software Development

Published: 13 June 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Nowadays, software projects are a vital element in any organization’s success. It plays the highest role in the organization’s success in most cases. Hence, its main focus is to earn more money on a project and minimize the developing time cost. Sometimes due to unavailability of experts may decrease the profit of the organization. Thus, the organization comes with these types of issues. They want to increase the profit and decrease the development time and on fewer budgets, hire the more expert people to achieve the organization’s goal. For this purpose, they are applying the new development approach called GSD (global software development). Through global software development, they develop their project on a reasonable budget and maximize profit. However, in GSD, other challenges of team communication, coordination, geographical location, and cultural and time zone differences increase the project’s effort. This paper shows the more critical factors in GSD and the more challenging and shows their impact. They are more challenging on which project manager or team leader more focus on these factors, which can be more helpful for the project’s success. This paper is more helpful for both industries and researchers in that they can easily estimate the effort in the context of GSD.

References

[1]
Turki Alelyani, Ke Mao, and Ye Yang. 2017. Context-centric pricing: early pricing models for software crowdsourcing tasks. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Predictive Models and Data Analytics in Software Engineering. 63–72.
[2]
Naveed Ali and Richard Lai. 2016. A method of requirements change management for global software development. Information and Software Technology 70 (2016), 49–67.
[3]
Julian M Bass, Beecham Sarah, Mohammed Abdur Razzak, and John Noll. 2018. Employee retention and turnover in global software development: Comparing in-house offshoring and offshore outsourcing. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 13th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, 77–86.
[4]
Nicolas Bettenburg, Meiyappan Nagappan, and Ahmed E Hassan. 2012. Think locally, act globally: Improving defect and effort prediction models. In 2012 9th IEEE Working Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR). IEEE, 60–69.
[5]
Ricardo Britto, Muhammad Usman, and Emilia Mendes. 2014. Effort estimation in agile global software development context. In International Conference on Agile Software Development. Springer, 182–192.
[6]
Saad Yasser Chadli, Ali Idri, Joaquín Nicolás Ros, José Luis Fernández-Alemán, Juan M Carrillo de Gea, and Ambrosio Toval. 2016. Software project management tools in global software development: a systematic mapping study. SpringerPlus 5, 1 (2016), 1–38.
[7]
Mario Coccia. 2018. Measurement of the evolution of technology: A new perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.08698(2018).
[8]
Ana Cristina Costa and Neil Anderson. 2011. Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20, 1(2011), 119–154.
[9]
Ana Cristina Costa and Neil Anderson. 2011. Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20, 1(2011), 119–154.
[10]
Fabio QB da Silva, Catarina Costa, A Cesar C Franca, and Rafael Prikladinicki. 2010. Challenges and solutions in distributed software development project management: A systematic literature review. In 2010 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering. IEEE, 87–96.
[11]
Jose Javier Dolado. 2000. A validation of the component-based method for software size estimation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 26, 10 (2000), 1006–1021.
[12]
D Hartama, Herman Mawengkang, M Zarlis, and RW Sembiring. 2017. Smart City: Utilization of IT resources to encounter natural disaster. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 890. IOP Publishing, 012076.
[13]
Danish Iqbal, Assad Abbas, Mazhar Ali, Muhammad Usman Shahid Khan, and Raheel Nawaz. 2020. Requirement validation for embedded systems in automotive industry through modeling. IEEE Access 8(2020), 8697–8719.
[14]
Dehua Ju. 2006. A concerted effort towards flourishing global software development. In Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Global software development for the practitioner. 62–65.
[15]
Huma Hayat Khan, Mohd Naz’ri bin Mahrin, and Suriayati bt Chuprat. 2014. Situational requirement engineering framework for global software development. In 2014 International Conference on Computer, Communications, and Control Technology (I4CT). IEEE, 224–229.
[16]
S Arun Kumar and Arun Kumar Thangavelu. 2013. Factors affecting the outcome of Global Software Development projects: An empirical study. In 2013 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics. IEEE, 1–10.
[17]
Adailton Magalhães Lima. 2010. Risk assessment on distributed software projects. In 2010 ACM/IEEE 32nd International Conference on Software Engineering, Vol. 2. IEEE, 349–350.
[18]
Sajjad Mahmood, Sajid Anwer, Mahmood Niazi, Mohammad Alshayeb, and Ita Richardson. 2017. Key factors that influence task allocation in global software development. Information and Software Technology 91 (2017), 102–122.
[19]
Prateeti Mohapatra, Petra Björndal, and Karen Smiley. 2010. Causal analysis of factors governing collaboration in global software development teams. In 2010 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering. IEEE, 128–132.
[20]
Mohammad Muhairat, Saleh Aldaajeh, and Rafa E Al-Qutaish. 2010. The impact of global software development factors on effort estimation methods. European Journal of Scientific Research 46, 2 (2010), 221–232.
[21]
Mahmood Niazi, Sajjad Mahmood, Mohammad Alshayeb, Abdul Majid Qureshi, Kanaan Faisal, and Narciso Cerpa. 2016. Toward successful project management in global software development. International Journal of Project Management 34, 8 (2016), 1553–1567.
[22]
Tuomas Niinimaki, Arttu Piri, and Casper Lassenius. 2009. Factors affecting audio and text-based communication media choice in global software development projects. In 2009 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering. IEEE, 153–162.
[23]
S Ramacharan and K Venu Gopala Rao. 2016. Software effort estimation of GSD projects using calibrated parametric estimation models. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Information and Communication Technology for Competitive Strategies. 1–8.
[24]
Md Rounok Salehin. 2013. Missing requirements information and its impact on software architectures: A case study. (2013).
[25]
Kathleen Swigger, Fatma Cemile Serce, Ferda Nur Alpaslan, Robert Brazile, George Dafoulas, and Victor Lopez. 2009. A comparison of team performance measures for global software development student teams. In 2009 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering. IEEE, 267–274.
[26]
June M Verner, O Pearl Brereton, Barbara A Kitchenham, Mahmood Turner, and Mahmood Niazi. 2014. Risks and risk mitigation in global software development: A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology 56, 1 (2014), 54–78.
[27]
Aurora Vizcaíno, Félix García, José Carlos Villar, Mario Piattini, and Javier Portillo. 2013. Applying Q-methodology to analyse the success factors in GSD. Information and Software Technology 55, 7 (2013), 1200–1211.
[28]
Minghui Wu and Hui Yan. 2009. Simulation in Software Engineering with System Dynamics: A Case Study.J. Softw. 4, 10 (2009), 1127–1135.
[29]
Minghui Wu and Hui Yan. 2009. Simulation in Software Engineering with System Dynamics: A Case Study.J. Softw. 4, 10 (2009), 1127–1135.
[30]
Ye Yang, Mei He, Mingshu Li, Qing Wang, and Barry Boehm. 2008. Phase distribution of software development effort. In Proceedings of the Second ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement. 61–69.
[31]
Atique Ahmad Zafar, Shahela Saif, Muzafar Khan, Javed Iqbal, Adnan Akhunzada, Abdul Wadood, Ahmad Al-Mogren, and Atif Alamri. 2017. Taxonomy of factors causing integration failure during global software development. IEEE Access 6(2017), 22228–22239.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
EASE '22: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering
June 2022
466 pages
ISBN:9781450396134
DOI:10.1145/3530019
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]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 June 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Cost Drivers
  2. Global Software Development (GSD)
  3. Software Effort Estimation

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

EASE 2022

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 71 of 232 submissions, 31%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 134
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)38
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media