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
An Analysis of Cumulative Voting
Blekinge Institute of Technology, School of Computing.
2011 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years))Student thesis
Abstract [en]

Context. Prioritization is essential part of requirements engineering, software release planning and many other software engineering disciplines. Cumulative Voting (CV) is known as relatively simple method for prioritizing requirements on a ratio scale. Historically, CV has been applied in decision making in government elections, corporate governance, and forestry. CV prioritization results are special type of data - compositional data. Any analysis of CV results must take into account the compositional nature of the CV results. Objectives. The purpose of this study is to aid decision making by collecting knowledge on the empirical use of CV and developing a method for detecting prioritization items with equal priority. Methods. We present a systematic literature review of CV and CV result analysis methods. The review is based on search in electronic databases and snowball sampling of the primary studies. Relevant studies are selected based on titles, abstracts, and full text inspection. Additionally, we propose Equality of Cumulative Votes (ECV) { a CV result analysis method that identifies prioritization items with equal priority. Results. CV has been used in not only in requirements prioritization and release planning but also in software process improvement, change impact analysis, model drive software development, etc. The review has resulted in a collection of state of the practice studies and CV result analysis methods. CV results can be analysed to detect stakeholder satisfaction and disagreement, see how the priorities differ among prioritization perspectives and stakeholder groups. ECV has been applied to 27 prioritization cases from 14 studies and has identified nine groups of equal items in three studies. Conclusions. We believe that collected studies and CV result analysis methods can help the adoption of CV prioritization method. The evaluation of ECV indicates that it is able to detect prioritization items with equal priority.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. , 75 p.
Keyword [en]
Cumulative Voting, Hundred-Dollar Test, requirements prioritization, Systematic Review
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:bth-3337Local ID: oai:bth.se:arkivex87130CB844918357C125794400706540OAI: oai:DiVA.org:bth-3337DiVA: diva2:830641
Uppsok
Technology
Supervisors
Available from: 2015-04-22 Created: 2011-11-10 Last updated: 2015-06-30Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1298 kB)184 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1298 kBChecksum SHA-512
2311b55c8240ab890439182990b760ddd3605c81e4102b8ad62db270be2f1449842512da6d23ea9893c6612a77904e262dbff09bd10fc63b30791d84c0daecf0
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Computing
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 184 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

Total: 36 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