S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Systematic Literature Review

Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki

<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Systematic Literature Review

Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki

<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: A Mapping Study

Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki

<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: A (preliminary) Mapping Study

Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki

<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Motivation

• Management of distributed software development projects has more challenges than traditional (co-located) development.– Which ones?

– Human (individual or social) factors?

• However, most organizations still manage distributed projects using the same tools used in traditional projects.– Really?

• There is no mapping study about the use of models and tools to support management in DSD projects.

5

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Research Questions

• RQ1 – What are the existing models for managing distributed software development?

• RQ2 – What are the existing tools which support management activities on distributed software development?

6

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Search Strings

• The PIO structure– Population: Distributed Software Development– Intervention: tools, models– Outcome: project management

• Synonyms and connectors:– (“Distributed software development” OR “Global software

development” OR “Collaborative software development” OR “Global software engineering” OR “Globally distributed work” OR “Collaborative software engineering” OR “Distributed development” OR “Distributed teams” OR “Global software teams” OR “Globally distributed development” OR “Geographically distributed software development” OR “Offshore software development” OR Offshoring OR Offshore OR “Offshore outsourcing” OR “Dispersed teams”) AND(Model* OR Process* OR Framework* OR Method* OR Technique* OR Methodolog* OR Tool* OR Software* OR Program* OR System*) AND(“Project Management”)

7

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Sources

• IEEEXplore Digital Library

• ACM Digital Library

• ScienceDirect

• EI Compendex

• ICGSE 2009

– whose papers were not available on the IEEEXplore at the time the initial search was performed.

8

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

• Inclusion:

– Reported tools and models for management ofdistributed software development projects

• Exclusion:

– Did not answer any of the two research questions

– Duplicated (select the most complete or recent)

– Not finished or incomplete.

9

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Selection Process

10

Step 1

Two researchers performed the search to identify

potentially relevant studies, based on reading titles

and excluding those papers which were clearly not

relevant.

Step 2The two lists (one from each researcher) were

merged.

Step 3

Studies on the resulting list were evaluated according

to the selection criteria, by reading abstract and

conclusion, and creating a final list of relevant

studies.

Step 4The data was extracted from reading the entire

content of the studies on the final list.

Similar to Tore Dybå et al. ESEM 2007.

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Quality Assessment

• Each study in the final list was assessed for its quality using ten criteria.

• Two researches provided scores for each criterion using a Likert-5 scale, varying from 4 (study fits the criterion completely) to 0 (study does not fit the criterion).

• Discrepancies above 5% in the final score were discussed and expert opinion was sought whenever necessary to reach an agreement.

11

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Data Analysis and Synthesis

• JabRef was used to support data extraction.

• Qualitative analysis was used to systematicallyextract data:

– Selective coding: to identify pieces of similar textual data

– Axial coding: to categorize and combining coded text

– Selective coding: to synthesize results (not presented here)

12

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Results

13

So

urc

e

Se

arc

h

Resu

lts

Po

ten

tia

lly

Rele

van

t

No

tR

ele

van

t

Rep

eate

d

Inc

om

ple

te

Rele

van

t

Stu

die

s

IEEEXplore 100 51 31 0 5 15

ACM 253 33 30 0 1 2

ScienceDirect 100 11 8 0 0 3

EI Compendex 350 19 9 8 0 2

ICGSE2009 64 41 34 0 4 3

TOTAL 867 155 112 8 10 25

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Results

14

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Number of Studies per Year of Publication

First year of ICGSE

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Results

15

Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent

<26% 26%-45% 46%-65% 66%-85% >86%

# of Studies 0 0 4 13 7

% 0% 0% 17% 54% 30%

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models

16

ModelsEvidence

# (quality)M1. Approach to Offshore Collaboration 1 (1E)

M2. Conceptual Model for Managing an International IS Development Project 1 (1E)

M3. Solar System 1 (1E)

M4. Framework for Supporting Management in Distributed Information Systems Development 1 (1VG)

M5. TAPER 1 (1VG)

M6. Process Maturity Framework for Managing Distributed Development 1 (1VG)

M7. Project Management Model 1 (1VG)

M8. Project Management Framework 1 (1VG)

M9: NEXTMOVE 1 (1VG)

M10. Framework to Enable Coordination in Distributed Software Development 1 (1G)

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Tools

17

Tools (T1-T24)Evidence

# (quality)T

RA

DIT

ION

AL

T1. E-mail 17 (10E, 6VG, 1G)

T2. Videoconference 14 (8E, 5VG, 1G)

T3. Messenger or chat 11 (7E, 4VG)

T5. Teleconference 8 (7E, 1VG)

T4. Phone 9 (6E, 3VG)

T6. Wiki 7 (4E, 3VG)

T7. Audio conference 5 (3E, 2VG)

T8. NetMeeting 4 (3E, 1VG)

T10. Virtual whiteboards 4 (2E, 2VG)

T9. Change management system 4 (2E, 1VG, 1G)

T11. Photo gallery 3 (1E, 2VG)

T13. Monitoring and Management 2 (2E)

T15. Fax 2 (2E)

T12. Team Intranet websites 3 (1E, 2VG)

T16. Electronic meeting systems 2 (1E, 1VG)

T14. Group calendars 2 (1E, 1VG)

T18. Blog 1 (1E)

T19. Lessons leaened databases 1 (1E)

T17. PowerPoint presentations 1 (1E)

T20. Voicemail 1 (VG)

SP

EC

IFIC

T21. CAMEL 1 (VG)

T22. NEXTMOVE 1 (VG)

T23. TAMRI 1 (VG)

T24. TeamSpace 1 (VG)

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Conclusions

• The reported works are relatively recent – 2002 ...

• There are few specific tools– 4/24 – 17%

• Models and specific tools have not been (extensively?) tested– The only evidence are from the proposers

• Is the literature in the field mature enough for a systematic review?

18

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Future Work

• This is part of a wider project ...

• ... that ultimately tries to understand theeffect of human factors on DSD.

19

(RQ1)

Challenges of

project management in

DSD.

(RQ2)

Best Practices

used to overcome

challenges.

(RQ3)

Tools that

support practices or

challenges.

(RQ4) Models or frameworks for DSD, possibly supported by tools, that

addresses challenges or support the use of best practices.

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Models and Tools for Managing Distributed Software Development: a Preliminary Mapping Study

Catarina Costa; Camila Cunha; Rodrigo Rocha; A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Rafael Prikladnicki

<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>

Thank you!

S

O

P

E

I

Infl

uen

ces

Is influenced

Challenges and Solutions in Distributed Software Development Project Management: a Systematic Literature Review by Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Catarina Costa, A. César C. França, Rafael Prikladinicki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Based on a work at Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, Staffordshire, UK, 2010.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.haseresearch.com