The choice of which software component to use influences the success of a software system. Only a few empirical studies investigate how the choice of components is conducted in industrial practice. This is important to understand to tailor research solutions to the needs of the industry. Existing studies focus on the choice for off-the-shelf (OTS) components. It is, however, also important to understand the implications of the choice of alternative component sourcing options (CSOs), such as outsourcing versus the use of OTS. Previous research has shown that the choice has major implications on the development process as well as on the ability to evolve the system. The objective of this study is to explore how decision making took place in industry to choose among CSOs. Overall, 22 industrial cases have been studied through a case survey. The results show that the solutions specifically for CSO decisions are deterministic and based on optimization approaches. The non-deterministic solutions proposed for architectural group decision making appear to suit the CSO decision making in industry better. Interestingly, the final decision was perceived negatively in nine cases and positively in seven cases, while in the remaining cases it was perceived as neither positive nor negative.

Background: Systematic literature studies are commonly used in software engineering. There are two main ways of conducting the searches for these type of studies; they are snowballing and database searches. In snowballing, the reference list (backward snowballing - BSB) and citations (forward snowballing - FSB) of relevant papers are reviewed to identify new papers whereas in a database search, different databases are searched using predefined search strings to identify new papers. Objective: Snowballing has not been in use as extensively as database search. Hence it is important to evaluate its efficiency and reliability when being used as a search strategy in literature studies. Moreover, it is important to compare it to database searches. Method: In this paper, we applied snowballing in a literature study, and reflected on the outcome. We also compared database search with backward and forward snowballing. Database search and snowballing were conducted independently by different researchers. The searches of our literature study were compared with respect to the efficiency and reliability of the findings. Results: Out of the total number of papers found, snowballing identified 83% of the papers in comparison to 46% of the papers for the database search. Snowballing failed to identify a few relevant papers, which potentially could have been addressed by identifying a more comprehensive start set. Conclusion: The efficiency of snowballing is comparable to database search. It can potentially be more reliable than a database search however, the reliability is highly dependent on the creation of a suitable start set.

Systematic literature reviews in software engineering are necessary to synthesize evidence from multiple studies to provide knowledge and decision support. However, synthesis methods are underutilized in software engineering research. Moreover, translation of synthesized data (outcomes of a systematic review) to provide recommendations for practitioners is seldom practiced. The objective of this paper is to introduce the use of Bayesian synthesis in software engineering research, in particular to translate research evidence into practice by providing the possibility to combine contextualized expert opinions with research evidence. We adopted the Bayesian synthesis method from health research and customized it to be used in software engineering research. The proposed method is described and illustrated using an example from the literature. Bayesian synthesis provides a systematic approach to incorporate subjective opinions in the synthesis process thereby making the synthesis results more suitable to the context in which they will be applied. Thereby, facilitating the interpretation and translation of knowledge to action/application. None of the synthesis methods used in software engineering allows for the integration of subjective opinions, hence using Bayesian synthesis can add a new dimension to the synthesis process in software engineering research.

Selecting sourcing options for software assets and components is an important process that helps companies to gain and keep their competitive advantage. The sourcing options include: in-house, COTS, open source and outsourcing. The objective of this paper is to further refine, extend and validate a solution presented in our previous work. The refinement includes a set of decision-making activities, which are described in the form of a process-line that can be used by decision-makers to build their specific decision-making process. We conducted five case studies in three companies to validate the coverage of the set of decision-making activities. The solution in our previous work was validated in two cases in the first two companies. In the validation, it was observed that no activity in the proposed set was perceived to be missing, although not all activities were conducted and the activities that were conducted were not executed in a specific order. Therefore, the refinement of the solution into a process-line approach increases the flexibility and hence it is better in capturing the differences in the decision-making processes observed in the case studies. The applicability of the process-line was then validated in three case studies in a third company. © 2017 Elsevier Inc.

Component-based software systems require decisions on component origins for acquiring components. A component origin is an alternative of where to get a component from. Objective: To identify factors that could influence the decision to choose among different component origins and solutions for decision-making (For example, optimization) in the literature. Method: A systematic review study of peer-reviewed literature has been conducted. Results: In total we included 24 primary studies. The component origins compared were mainly focused on in-house vs. COTS and COTS vs. OSS. We identified 11 factors affecting or influencing the decision to select a component origin. When component origins were compared, there was little evidence on the relative (either positive or negative) effect of a component origin on the factor. Most of the solutions were proposed for in-house vs. COTS selection and time, cost and reliability were the most considered factors in the solutions. Optimization models were the most commonly proposed technique used in the solutions. Conclusion: The topic of choosing component origins is a green field for research, and in great need of empirical comparisons between the component origins, as well of how to decide between different combinations of them.