Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Decision-making support for choosing among different component origins.
2018 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Karlskrona: Blekinge Tekniska Högskola, 2018. , p. 288
Series
Blekinge Institute of Technology Doctoral Dissertation Series, ISSN 1653-2090 ; 5
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-15969ISBN: 978-91-7295-351-2 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-15969DiVA, id: diva2:1191892
Public defence
2018-05-08, J1650, Blekinge Institute of Technology – Campus Gräsvik, Karlskrona, 09:30 (English)
Opponent
Available from: 2018-03-26 Created: 2018-03-20 Last updated: 2018-03-28Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. Choosing Component Origins for Software Intensive Systems In-house, COTS, OSS or Outsourcing?: A Case Survey
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Choosing Component Origins for Software Intensive Systems In-house, COTS, OSS or Outsourcing?: A Case Survey
Show others...
2018 (English)In: IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, ISSN 0098-5589, E-ISSN 1939-3520, Vol. 39, no 12, p. 237-261Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IEEE Computer Society, 2018
Keyword
Decision making; in-house; COTS; OSS; outsourcing
National Category
Computer Systems
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-15909 (URN)10.1109/TSE.2017.2677909 (DOI)000427678400002 ()
Projects
ORION - Decision Support for Component-Based Software Engineering of Cyber-Physical Systems
Available from: 2017-11-20 Created: 2018-02-20 Last updated: 2018-04-06Bibliographically approved
2. Experiences from Using Snowballing and Database Searches in Systematic Literature Studies
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Experiences from Using Snowballing and Database Searches in Systematic Literature Studies
2015 (English)Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ACM Press, 2015
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-11371 (URN)10.1145/2745802.2745818 (DOI)978-1-4503-3350-4 (ISBN)
Conference
Proceedings 19th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2015), Nanjing, China
Funder
Knowledge Foundation, 20140218
Available from: 2016-01-06 Created: 2016-01-06 Last updated: 2018-03-20Bibliographically approved
3. Guidelines for Knowledge Translation in Software Engineering
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Guidelines for Knowledge Translation in Software Engineering
(English)In: Article in journal (Refereed) Submitted
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-15968 (URN)
Available from: 2018-03-20 Created: 2018-03-20 Last updated: 2018-03-27Bibliographically approved
4. Bayesian Synthesis for Knowledge Translation in Software Engineering: Method and Illustration
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Bayesian Synthesis for Knowledge Translation in Software Engineering: Method and Illustration
2016 (English)In: 2016 42th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), IEEE, 2016Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IEEE, 2016
Series
2016 42th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), ISSN 2376-9505
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-11771 (URN)10.1109/SEAA.2016.45 (DOI)000386649000024 ()978-1-5090-2819-1 (ISBN)
Conference
Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), Limassol, CYPRUS
Available from: 2016-03-23 Created: 2016-03-23 Last updated: 2018-03-20Bibliographically approved
5. A decision-making process-line for selection of software asset origins and components
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A decision-making process-line for selection of software asset origins and components
Show others...
2018 (English)In: Journal of Systems and Software, ISSN 0164-1212, E-ISSN 1873-1228, Vol. 135, p. 88-104Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Inc., 2018
Keyword
Case study, Component-based software engineering, Decision-making, Competition, Concrete pavements, Open source software, Software engineering, Competitive advantage, Decision makers, Decision making process, Open sources, Selection of software, Software assets, Specific ordering, Decision making
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-15512 (URN)10.1016/j.jss.2017.09.033 (DOI)2-s2.0-85032856583 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2017-12-07 Created: 2017-12-07 Last updated: 2018-03-20Bibliographically approved
6. Software Component Decision-making: In-house, OSS, COTS or Outsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Software Component Decision-making: In-house, OSS, COTS or Outsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review
2016 (English)In: Journal of Systems and Software, ISSN 0164-1212, E-ISSN 1873-1228, Vol. 121, p. 105-124Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Keyword
Component-based software engineering; COTS; Decision-making; In-house development; OSS; Outsourcing
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:bth-11759 (URN)10.1016/j.jss.2016.07.027 (DOI)000384864500008 ()
Available from: 2016-03-18 Created: 2016-03-18 Last updated: 2018-03-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

summary(10 kB)5 downloads
File information
File name SUMMARY01.pdfFile size 10 kBChecksum SHA-512
8a91d8ac4b9b7451a3dc40f833fc053579588655bf6408117ccd8f3993ac50bd9c22a8ba2ead04c55acdba22e37fb256626cd420bf66474db8d5f153285e6be5
Type summaryMimetype application/pdf
fulltext(3715 kB)48 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 3715 kBChecksum SHA-512
dacfd7f7a6020597a4de7f048ef6a8e12e37c9bd0ce33e0be9ddad5669c9eb4efb081bb3f763df2d2492ea8a50bfb48acde42d0dd7999c0ae2bad91181e238e3
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Badampudi, Deepika
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 48 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 123 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf