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
Selecting component sourcing options: A survey of software engineering's broader make-or-buy decisions
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB, SWE.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering.
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: Information and Software Technology, ISSN 0950-5849, E-ISSN 1873-6025, Vol. 112, p. 18-34Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Context: Component-based software engineering (CBSE) is a common approach to develop and evolve contemporary software systems. When evolving a system based on components, make-or-buy decisions are frequent, i.e., whether to develop components internally or to acquire them from external sources. In CBSE, several different sourcing options are available: (1) developing software in-house, (2) outsourcing development, (3) buying commercial-off-the-shelf software, and (4) integrating open source software components. Objective: Unfortunately, there is little available research on how organizations select component sourcing options (CSO) in industry practice. In this work, we seek to contribute empirical evidence to CSO selection. Method: We conduct a cross-domain survey on CSO selection in industry, implemented as an online questionnaire. Results: Based on 188 responses, we find that most organizations consider multiple CSOs during software evolution, and that the CSO decisions in industry are dominated by expert judgment. When choosing between candidate components, functional suitability acts as an initial filter, then reliability is the most important quality. Conclusion: We stress that future solution-oriented work on decision support has to account for the dominance of expert judgment in industry. Moreover, we identify considerable variation in CSO decision processes in industry. Finally, we encourage software development organizations to reflect on their decision processes when choosing whether to make or buy components, and we recommend using our survey for a first benchmarking. © 2019

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier B.V. , 2019. Vol. 112, p. 18-34
Keywords [en]
Component-based software engineering, Decision making, Software architecture, Sourcing, Survey, Decision support systems, Open systems, Software design, Surveying, Surveys, Commercial off-the-shelf softwares, Industry practices, Make-or-buy decisions, Online questionnaire, Software development organizations, Software Evolution, Open source software
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-17871DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2019.03.015ISI: 000469899100002Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85064013176OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-17871DiVA, id: diva2:1313029
Available from: 2019-05-02 Created: 2019-05-02 Last updated: 2019-06-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Chatzipetrou, PanagiotaWnuk, KrzysztofAlégroth, EmilGorschek, Tony

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Chatzipetrou, PanagiotaWnuk, KrzysztofAlégroth, EmilGorschek, Tony
By organisation
Department of Software Engineering
In the same journal
Information and Software Technology
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 75 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