nach oben

Empirical Software Engineering

Erschienen in:

01.12.2022

C2M: a maturity model for the evaluation of communication in distributed software development

verfasst von: Ivaldir de Farias Junior, Sabrina Marczak, Rodrigo Santos, Cleyton Rodrigues, Hermano Moura

Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering | Ausgabe 7/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Communication is essential in any software development project, particularly those globally distributed where geographical, temporal, and cultural distance may hinder the effectiveness of communication. The challenges imposed by distance often characterize communication as still one of the main drawbacks of globally distributed projects. Therefore, establishing communication processes and practices is relevant to support a team’s work. These processes and practices need to be updated and aligned with the team’s needs. Thus, assessing and evaluating the maturity of such communication processes and practices is paramount. This article presents a Communication Maturity Model called C2M which aims to help organizations identify the maturity of communication-related aspects by providing an approach for revealing what practices need to be improved. The model is composed of 4 levels of maturity (causal, partially managed, managed and reflective) and 4 areas of maturity (people, project, organizational and engineering) which are organized into 15 maturity factors, each factor comprising a set of practices. The model has 58 practices and each has its specific objectives. The model was empirically developed and evaluated in three well-defined phases. In the conception phase, methodological procedures (Tertiary Study, Systematic Literature Review, and Interviews) were carried out in order to gather relevant information for designing the first version of the C2M model (alpha version). Then, in the refinement phase, two focus group meetings were held in two organizations in order to identify how effectively the model attends its purpose. The results led to a second version of the C2M model (beta version), analyzed by a survey with experts who assessed the representation of the third version of the C2M model—omega version (evaluation phase). All results achieved so far suggest that the model can assist in discovering the maturity level of the communication processes and practices in globally distributed projects. Future works will focus on developing a software tool to help with self-assessment.

Vorheriger Artikel Static test flakiness prediction: How Far Can We Go?

Nächster Artikel A machine and deep learning analysis among SonarQube rules, product, and process metrics for fault prediction

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Aoyama M (1998) Agile software process and its experience. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Software engineering. IEEE, pp 3–12

Barros A M, Silva JRGD (2010) Percepções dos indivíduos sobre as consequências do teletrabalho na configuração home-office: estudo de caso na shell brasil. CADERNOS Ebape br 8(1):71–91CrossRef

Basile K A, Beauregard T A (2016) Strategies for successful telework: how effective employees manage work/home boundaries. Strategic HR review

Beecham S, Hall T, Britton C, Cottee M, Rainer A (2005) Using an expert panel to validate a requirements process improvement model. J Syst Softw 76(3):251–275CrossRef

Beecham S, Clear T, Lal R, Noll J (2021) Do scaling agile frameworks address global software development risks? an empirical study. J Syst Softw 171:110823CrossRef

Bietz M J (2008) Effects of communication media on the interpretation of critical feedback. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, pp 467–476

Bietz M J (2013) Distributed work: working and learning at a distance. In: Technology-enhanced professional learning, Routledge, pp 48–58

Bietz M J, Abrams S, Cooper D M, Stevens K R, Puga F, Patel D I, Olson G M, Olson J S (2012) Improving the odds through the collaboration success wizard. Transl Behav Med 2(4):480–486CrossRef

Bjørnson FO, Wijnmaalen J, Stettina CJ, Dingsøyr T (2018) Inter-team coordination in large-scale agile development: a case study of three enabling mechanisms. In: Lecture notes in business information processing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91602-6_15. Springer International Publishing, pp 216–231

Britto R, Cruzes D S, Smite D, Sablis A (2017) Onboarding software developers and teams in three globally distributed legacy projects: a multi-case study. J Softw: Evol Process 30(4):e1921. https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.1921

Carlini-Cotrim B (1996) Potencialidades da técnica qualitativa grupo focal em investigações sobre abuso de substâncias. Revista de Saú,de Pública 30:285–293CrossRef

Cataldo M, Herbsleb J D, Carley K M (2008) Socio-technical congruence: a framework for assessing the impact of technical and work dependencies on software development productivity. In: Proceedings of the second ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement, pp 2–11

Coutinho C M G F P (2005) Percursos da investigação em Tecnologia Educativa em portugal: uma abordagem temática e metodológica a publicações científicas (1985–2000)

Curtis DB, Hefley WE, Miller SA (2002) The people capability maturity model: guidelines for improving the workforce. Addison-Wesley

da Silva F Q, Costa C, Franca A C C, Prikladinicki R (2010) Challenges and solutions in distributed software development project management: a systematic literature review. In: 2010 5th IEEE international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE), IEEE, pp 87–96

Da Silva F, Prikladnicki R, Franca P, Monteiro C, Costa C, Rocha R (2011) Research and practice of distributed software development project management: a systematic literature review. Submetido para Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution

Daft R L, Lengel R H (1983) Information richness. A new approach to managerial behavior and organization design. Tech. rep. https://doi.org/10.21236/ada128980

Damian D (2007) Stakeholders in global requirements engineering: lessons learned from practice. IEEE Softw 24(2)

Damian D E, Zowghi D (2002) The impact of stakeholders’ geographical distribution on managing requirements in a multi-site organization. In: IEEE joint international conference on requirements engineering, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE, pp 319–328

De Farias Junior I H, de Azevedo R R, de Moura H P, da Silva D S M (2012) Elicitation of communication inherent risks in distributed software development. In: 2012 IEEE seventh international conference on global software engineering workshops (ICGSEW). IEEE, pp 37–42

De Farias Junior I H, de Moura H P, Marczak S (2013) Towards a communication maturity model for distributed software development. In: IEEE 8th international conference on global software engineering workshops (ICGSEW). IEEE, pp 81–83

De Souza C R, Basaveswara S D, Redmiles D F (2002) Supporting global software development with event notification servers. In: Proceedings of the ICSE 2002 international workshop on global software development

Deshpande S, Richardson I, Casey V, Beecham S (2010) Culture in global software development-a weakness or strength?. In: 2010 5th IEEE international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, pp 67–76

Dias-Neto A C, Spinola R, Travassos G H (2010) Developing software technologies through experimentation: experiences from the battlefield. In: XIII Ibero-American conference on software engineering

dos Santos A C, de Farias Junior I H, de Moura H P, Marczak S (2012) A systematic tertiary study of communication in distributed software development projects. In: 2012 IEEE seventh international conference on global software engineering (icgse). IEEE, pp 182–182

Earthy J, Bowler Y, Forster M, Taylor R (1999) A human factors integration capability maturity model. In: 1999 International conference on human interfaces in control rooms, cockpits and command centres, IET, pp 320–326

Evaristo R (2003) The management of distributed projects across cultures. J Glob Inf Manag 11(4):58CrossRef

Farias Junior I H, de Moura H P, Marczak S (2013) Towards a communication maturity model for distributed software development. In: 2013 IEEE 8th international conference on global software engineering workshops. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSEW.2013.18, pp 81–83

Farias Junior I, Marczak S, Santos R, Moura H (2016) Communication in distributed software development: a preliminary maturity model. In: 2016 IEEE 11th international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE). IEEE, pp 164–173

Farias Junior IHD, Torcate A, Gois D (2021) Melhores práticas de comunicação em desenvolvimento distribuído de software: Uma revisão sistemática da literatura. Revista dos Mestrados Profissionais 10(1). https://doi.org/10.51359/2317-0115.2021.249072

Ferreira T, Farias Junior I (2014) Modelo de comunicação virtual: O “logos” que fundamenta o conceito. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciê,ncias da Comunicação (3) 2182–7095

Fidler R (1997) Mediamorphosis: understanding new media. Pine Forge Press

Fontana R M, Meyer V, Reinehr S, Malucelli A (2015) Progressive outcomes: a framework for maturing in agile software development. J Syst Softw 102:88–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.12.032CrossRef

Fontana R M, Albuquerque R, Luz R, Moises A C, Malucelli A, Reinehr S (2018) Maturity models for agile software development: what are they?. In: Communications in computer and information science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97925-0_1. Springer International Publishing, pp 3–14

Garcia VC (2010) Rise reference model for software reuse adoption in Brazilian companies

Greer T W, Payne S C (2014) Overcoming telework challenges: outcomes of successful telework strategies. Psychol-Manag J 17(2):87

Herbsleb J D, Moitra D (2001) Global software development. IEEE Softw 18(2):16–20CrossRef

Jalali S, Wohlin C (2011) Global software engineering and agile practices: a systematic review. J Softw: Evol Process 24(6):643–659. https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.561

Jusoh Y Y, Nor R N H, Mahmood B A, Wafeeq M T, Ali M A, Jusoh M N B (2018) Communication management in global software development projects. In: 2018 Fourth international conference on information retrieval and knowledge management (CAMP). https://doi.org/10.1109/infrkm.2018.8464824. IEEE

Khan RA, Idris MY, Khan SU, Ilyas M, Ali S, Din AU, Murtaza G, Khan AW, Jan SU (2019) An evaluation framework for communication and coordination processes in offshore software development outsourcing relationship: using fuzzy methods. IEEE Access 7:112879–112906. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2924404CrossRef

Kitchenham B, Charters S (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering version 2.3. Engineering 45(4ve):1051

Kneuper R (2008) CMMI: improving software and systems development processes using capability maturity model integration. Rocky Nook

Kontio J, Lehtola L, Bragge J (2004) Using the focus group method in software engineering: obtaining practitioner and user experiences. In: Proceedings—2004 international symposium on empirical software engineering, ISESE 2004. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISESE.2004.1334914, pp 271–280

Korkala M, Maurer F (2014) Waste identification as the means for improving communication in globally distributed agile software development. J Syst Softw 95:122–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.03.080CrossRef

Lasswell H D (1948) The structure and function of communication in society. Commun Ideas 37:215–228

Leitão Júnior N, Junior I F, Marczak S, Santos R, Furtado F (2015) Identifying the maturity of communication processes in distributed software development: a preliminary study of four software organizations. In: Workshop anual do MPS (WAMPS). SOFTEX, Curitiba, Brazil, pp 49–60

Li M, Smidts C S (2003) A ranking of software engineering measures based on expert opinion. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 29(9):811–824CrossRef

Lockamy A, McCormack K (2004) The development of a supply chain management process maturity model using the concepts of business process orientation. Supply Chain Manag: Int J

Mafra S, Barcelos R, Travassos G (2006) Applying an evidence based methodology on the definition of new software technologies. In: Proceedings of SBC 20th Brazilian symposium software engineering (SBES 2006) (in Portuguese), Florianópolis, Nrazil, pp 239–254

Merriam SB, Tisdell EJ (2015) Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. Wiley

Moe N B, Šmite D (2008) Understanding a lack of trust in global software teams: a multiple-case study. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 13(3):217–231CrossRef

Morstead SP, Blount GT, Beatty R (2003) Offshore ready: strategies to plan and profit from offshore IT-enabled services. Isani Press

Munaretto L F, Corrêa H L, Carneiro da Cunha J A (2013) Um estudo sobre as características do método Delphi e de grupo focal, como técnicas na obtenção de dados em pesquisas exploratórias. Revista de Administração da UFSM 6(1):9–24. https://doi.org/10.5902/198346596243CrossRef

Newcomb T M (1966) An approach to the study of communicative acts. Commun Culture 1:66–79

Nohara J J, Acevedo C R, Ribeiro A F, da Silva M M (2010) O teletrabalho na percepção dos teletrabalhadores. INMR-Innov Manag Rev 7(2):150–170

Oliveira WAD (2006) Modelos de maturidade: visão geral. Mundo PM (6):06–11

Olson G M, Olson J S (2000) Distance matters. Hum–Comput Interact 15(2-3):139–178CrossRef

Ozcan-Top O, Demirörs O (2013) Assessment of agile maturity models: a multiple case study. In: Communications in computer and information science. Springer, Berlin, pp 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38833-0_12

Perry D E, Staudenmayer N A, Votta L G (1994) People, organizations, and process improvement. IEEE Softw 11(4):36–45CrossRef

Pikkarainen M, Haikara J, Salo O, Abrahamsson P, Still J (2008) The impact of agile practices on communication in software development. Empir Softw Eng 13(3):303–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-008-9065-9CrossRef

Pilatti L S M et al (2006) Estrutura e características para análise de ambientes de desenvolvimento global de software em organizações offshore insourcing

PMI (2013) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (pmbok®; guide)—5th edn

Prikladnicki R (2003) Munddos-um modelo de referência para desenvolvimento distribuído de software. 2003. 144f. PhD thesis, Tese (Mestrado)-Faculdade de Informática da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul

Prikladnicki R (2009) Padrões de evolução na prática de desenvolvimento distribuído de software em ambientes de internal offshoring: um modelo de capacidade

Prikladnicki R, Audy J, Glanzner R (2011) Wave–um modelo de capacidade para desenvolvimento de software com captive centers. In: Brazilian symposium on software quality, Curitiba, Brazil

Ramasubbu N, Krishnan M S, Kompalli P (2005) Leveraging global resources: a process maturity framework for managing distributed development. IEEE Softw 22(3):80–86CrossRef

Rendon R G, Garrett G A (2005) Managing contracts in turbulent times: the contract management maturity model. Contract

Saleem N, Mathrani S, Taskin N (2019) Understanding the different levels of challenges in global software development. In: 2019 ACM/IEEE 14th international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE). https://doi.org/10.1109/icgse.2019.00027. IEEE

Shannon C (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423 & 623–656MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Sinha R, Shameem M, Kumar C (2020) Swot: strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for scaling agile methods in global software development. In: Proceedings of the 13th innovations in software engineering conference on formerly known as India Software engineering conference, ISEC 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3385032.3385037. Association for Computing Machinery, New York

Spínola RO, Pinto FCR, Travassos G (2008) Supporting requirements definition and quality assurance in ubiquitous software project. In: Communications in computer and information science. Springer, Berlin, pp 587–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88479-8_42

Stojanov I, Turetken O, Trienekens J J (2015) A maturity model for scaling agile development. In: 2015 41st Euromicro conference on software engineering and advanced applications. https://doi.org/10.1109/seaa.2015.29. IEEE

Stray V, Moe N B (2020) Understanding coordination in global software engineering: a mixed-methods study on the use of meetings and slack. J Syst Softw 170:110717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2020.110717. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121220301564CrossRef

Stray V, Moe N B, Noroozi M (2019) Slack me if you can! Using enterprise social networking tools in virtual agile teams. In: 2019 ACM/IEEE 14th international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE), pp 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2019.00031

Team C P (2006) Cmmi for development, version 1.2

Tremblay M C, Hevner A R, Berndt D J (2010) Focus groups for artifact refinement and evaluation in design research. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 26. https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.02627

Vieira JK, de Farias Junior I, de Moura HP, da Silva DSM (2020) Multi-model software process improvement based on c2m and mr-mps-sw models. J Inf Syst Eng Manag 5(4):em0127

Visconti M, Cook C R (1998) Evolution of a maturity model–critical evaluation and lessons learned. Softw Qual J 7(3):223–237CrossRef

Wheeler T, Cramond W, Hora S, Unwin S (1989) Analysis of core damage frequency from internal events: expert judgment elicitation. Part 1: Expert panel results. Part 2: project staff results. Tech. rep. Sandia National Laboratories

Wilbur S (1966) How communication works. The process and effects of mass communication. Urbana

Yin RK (2009) Case study research, design & methods, 4th edn

Titel: C2M: a maturity model for the evaluation of communication in distributed software development
verfasst von: Ivaldir de Farias Junior
Sabrina Marczak
Rodrigo Santos
Cleyton Rodrigues
Hermano Moura
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Empirical Software Engineering / Ausgabe 7/2022
Print ISSN: 1382-3256
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7616
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-022-10211-9

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2022

Stubbifier: debloating dynamic server-side JavaScript applications

Extracting enhanced artificial intelligence model metadata from software repositories

On the usage and development of deep learning compilers: an empirical study on TVM

Exploring the relationship between performance metrics and cost saving potential of defect prediction models

Basic block coverage for search-based unit testing and crash reproduction

Comparing ϕ and the F-measure as performance metrics for software-related classifications

Premium Partner