nach oben

Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

Erschienen in:

01.12.2009

Testing in the Wild: The Social and Organisational Dimensions of Real World Practice

verfasst von: John Rooksby, Mark Rouncefield, Ian Sommerville

Erschienen in: Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) | Ausgabe 5-6/2009

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Testing is a key part of any systems engineering project. There is an extensive literature on testing, but very little that focuses on how testing is carried out in real-world circumstances. This is partly because current practices are often seen as unsophisticated and ineffective. We believe that by investigating and characterising the real-world work of testing we can help question why such ‘bad practices’ occur and how improvements might be made. We also argue that the testing literature is too focused on technological issues when many of the problems, and indeed strengths, have as much do with work and organisation. In this paper we use empirical examples from four systems engineering projects to demonstrate how and in what ways testing is a cooperative activity. In particular we demonstrate the ways in which testing is situated within organisational work and satisfices organisational and marketplace demands.

Vorheriger Artikel Using Developer Activity Data to Enhance Awareness during Collaborative Software Development

Nächster Artikel Software Development Cultures and Cooperation Problems: A Field Study of the Early Stages of Development of Software for a Scientific Community

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

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

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"

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

Ahonen, J., Junttila, T., & Sakkinen, M. (2004). Impacts of the organizational model on testing: three industrial cases. Empirical Software Engineering, 9(4), 275–296.CrossRef

Alby, F., & Zucchermaglio, C. (2009). Time, narratives and participation frameworks in software troubleshooting. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 18(2–3), 129–146.CrossRef

Bach, J. (1998). A framework for good enough testing. IEEE Computer, 31(10), 124–126.MathSciNet

Beizer, B. (1983). Software testing techniques. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Blythin, S., Hughes, J., Kristoffersen, S., Rodden, T., & Rouncefield, M. (1997). Recognising ‘success’ and ‘failure’: Evaluating groupware in a commercial context. In Proceedings of Group’97, The ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, Phoenix, USA, November 16–19, 1997, pp. 39–46.

Brooks, F. (1975). The mythical man month. Essays on software engineering. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

Büscher, M., O’Neill, J., & Rooksby, J. (2009). Designing for diagnosing: introduction to the special issue on diagnostic work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 18(2–3), 109–128.CrossRef

Button, G. (2000). The ethnographic tradition and design. Design Studies, 21(4), 319–332.CrossRef

Button, G., & Sharrock, W. (1992). Occasioned practices in the work of software engineers. In M. Jirotka & J. Goguen (Eds.), Requirements analysis: Social and technical issues (pp. 217–240). London: Academic.

Button, G., & Sharrock, W. (1996). Project work: the organisation of collaborative design and development in software engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 5(4), 369–386.CrossRef

Button, G., & Sharrock, W. (1998). The organisational accountability of technological work. Social Studies of Science, 28(1), 78–102.CrossRef

Capretz, L. (2003). Personality types in software engineering. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(2), 207–214.CrossRef

Carstensen, P., & Sørensen, C. (1995). Let’s talk about bugs!. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 7(1), 33–54.

Collins, H. (1988). Public experiments and displays of virtuosity: the core set revisited. Social Studies of Science, 18(4), 725–748.CrossRef

Cornford, J., & Pollock, N. (2003). Putting the university online. Information technology and organisational change. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Da Cunha, A., & Greathead, D. (2007). Does personality matter? An analysis of code-review ability. Communications of the ACM, 50(5), 109–112.CrossRef

Dant, T., & Francis, D. (1998). Planning in organisations: rational control or contingent activity? Sociological Research Online, 3(2), <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/3/2/4.html>.

Dijkstra, E. (1972). The humble programmer. Communications of the ACM, 15(10), 859–866.CrossRef

Downer, J. (2007). When the chick hits the fan: representativeness and reproducibility in technological tests. Social Studies of Science, 37(1), 7–26.CrossRef

Evans, M. (1984). Productive software test management. New York: Wiley.

Feller, J., & Fitzgerald, B. (2001). Understanding open source software development. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Harper, R. (2000). The organisation in ethnography. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 9(2), 239–264.CrossRef

Home Office Identity and Passport Service. (2007). Report on key projects implemented in 2007. http://www.ips.gov.uk/passport/downloads/IPS-report-on-key-projects-implemented-2007.pdf (retrieved 20th September 2008).

House of Commons Transport Committee. (2008). The opening of Heathrow Terminal 5. Twelfth Report of Session 2007-08. London: The Stationary Office Limited.

Jorgensen, P. (2002). Software testing a craftsman’s approach. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Juristo, N., Moreno, A., & Strigel, W. (2006a). Guest editors’ introduction: software testing practices in industry. IEEE Software, 23(4), 19–21.CrossRef

Juristo, N., Moreno, A., Vegas, S., & Solari, M. (2006b). In search of what we experimentally know about unit testing. IEEE Software, 23(6), 72–80.CrossRef

Kaner, C., Bach, J., & Pettichord, B. (2002). Lessons learned in software testing. New York: Wiley.

Lippert, M., Roock, S., & Wolf, H. (2002). Extreme programming in action. Practical examples from real world projects. New York: Wiley.

Mackenzie, D. (1990). Inventing accuracy: A historical sociology of nuclear missile Guidance. Cambridge: MIT.

Mackenzie, D. (2001). Mechanizing proof. Computing, risk and trust. Cambridge: MIT.MATH

Martin, D., Hartswood, M., Slack, R., & Voss, A. (2007a). Achieving dependability in the configuration, integration and testing of healthcare technologies. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(5–6), 467–499.CrossRef

Martin, D., Rooksby, J., & Rouncefield, M. (2007b). Users as contextual features of software product development and testing. In Proceedings of Group’07, pp. 301–310.

Martin, D., Rooksby, J., Rouncefield, M., & Sommerville, I. (2007c). ‘Good’ organisational reasons for ‘bad’ software testing: An ethnographic study of testing in a small software company. In Proceedings of ICSE’07, pp. 602–611.

Miller, J., & Zhichao, Y. (2004). A cognitive-based mechanism for constructing software inspection teams. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 30(11), 811–825.CrossRef

Myers, G. (1976). The art of software testing. New York: Wiley.

Patton, R. (2006). Software testing. Indianapolis: Sams.

Pinch, T. (1993). “Testing—One, two, three… testing!”: towards a sociology of testing. Science Technology & Human Values, 18(1), 25–41.CrossRefMathSciNet

Randall, D., Harper, R., & Rouncefield, M. (2007). Fieldwork for design: Theory and practice. London: Springer Verlag.

Reddy, M., Dourish, P., & Pratt, W. (2006). Temporality in medical work: time also matters. Computer Supported cooperative work, 15(1), 29–53.CrossRef

Rönkkö, K., Dittrich, Y., & Randall, D. (2005). When plans do not work out: how plans are used in software development projects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(5), 433–468.CrossRef

Royce, W. (1970). Managing the development of large software systems. In Proceedings of WESTCON, August 1970, reprinted in Proceedings of ICSE ‘87 the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering, Monterey, USA. pp. 328–338.

Runeson, P. (2006). A survey of unit testing practices. IEEE Software, July/August 2006, pp. 22–29.

Schmidt, K., & Bannon, L. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously: supporting articulation work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(1–2), 7–40.CrossRef

Segal, J. (2005). When software engineers met research scientists: a case study. Empirical Software Engineering, 10(4), 517–536.CrossRef

Sharrock, W., & Anderson, B. (1993). Working towards agreement. In G. Button (Ed.), Technology in working order (pp. 149–161). London: Routledge.

Sharrock, W., & Anderson, B. (1994). The user as a scenic feature of design space. Design Studies, 15(1), 5–18.CrossRef

Simon, H. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge: MIT.

Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated action: The problem of the human—machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tassey, G. (2002). The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce Technology Administration. RTI Project Number 7007.011.

Whittaker, J. (2000). What is software testing? And why is it so hard? IEEE Software, 17(1), 70–79.CrossRef

Whittaker, J. (2002). How to break software: A practical guide to testing. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

Winter, J., Rönkkö, K., Ahlberg, M., & Hotchkiss, J. (2008). Meeting organisational needs and quality assurance through balancing agile & formal usability testing results. In Proceedings of CEE-SET the 3rd IFIP TC2 Central and East European Conference on Software Engineering Techniques, Brno, Czech Republic, Oct. 13–15.

Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the user, the case of usability trials. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters. Essays on power technology and domination (pp. 58–100). London: Routledge.

Titel: Testing in the Wild: The Social and Organisational Dimensions of Real World Practice
verfasst von: John Rooksby
Mark Rouncefield
Ian Sommerville
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2009
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) / Ausgabe 5-6/2009
Print ISSN: 0925-9724
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7551
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-009-9098-7

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+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5-6/2009

Integration and Generification—Agile Software Development in the Healthcare Market

Software Engineering as Cooperative Work

On The Roles of APIs in the Coordination of Collaborative Software Development

What Counts as Software Process? Negotiating the Boundary of Software Work Through Artifacts and Conversation

Bridging, Patching and Keeping the Work Flowing: Defect Resolution in Distributed Software Development

Using Developer Activity Data to Enhance Awareness during Collaborative Software Development