Persuading developers to buy into software process improvement: a local opinion and empirical evidence

A. Rainer; T. Hall; N. Baddoo

Persuading developers to buy into software process improvement: a local opinion and empirical evidence

A. Rainer, T. Hall, N. Baddoo

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

39 Citations (Scopus)

53 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In order to investigate practitioners’ opinions of software process and software process improvement, we have collected a large volume of qualitative evidence from 13 companies. At the same time, other researchers have reported investigations of practitioners, and we are interested in how their reports may relate to our evidence. Thus, other research publications can also be treated as a form of qualitative data. In this paper, we review advice on a method, content analysis, that is used to analyse qualitative data. We use content analysis to describe and analyse discussions on software process and software process improvement. We report preliminary findings from an analysis of both the focus group evidence and four publications.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Procs 2003 Int Symp on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE)
Publisher	Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Pages	326-335
ISBN (Print)	0-7695-2002-2
Publication status	Published - 2003

Access to Document

902233.pdf

Cite this

@inproceedings{243eba88ab814bb982a7364e4be79b5b,

title = "Persuading developers to buy into software process improvement: a local opinion and empirical evidence",

abstract = "In order to investigate practitioners{\textquoteright} opinions of software process and software process improvement, we have collected a large volume of qualitative evidence from 13 companies. At the same time, other researchers have reported investigations of practitioners, and we are interested in how their reports may relate to our evidence. Thus, other research publications can also be treated as a form of qualitative data. In this paper, we review advice on a method, content analysis, that is used to analyse qualitative data. We use content analysis to describe and analyse discussions on software process and software process improvement. We report preliminary findings from an analysis of both the focus group evidence and four publications.",

author = "A. Rainer and T. Hall and N. Baddoo",

note = "This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.---- Copyright IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.",

year = "2003",

language = "English",

isbn = "0-7695-2002-2",

pages = "326--335",

booktitle = "Procs 2003 Int Symp on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE)",

publisher = "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)",

address = "United States",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Persuading developers to buy into software process improvement: a local opinion and empirical evidence

AU - Rainer, A.

AU - Hall, T.

AU - Baddoo, N.

N1 - This material is presented to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work. Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.---- Copyright IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or to reuse any copyrighted component of this work in other works must be obtained from the IEEE.

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - In order to investigate practitioners’ opinions of software process and software process improvement, we have collected a large volume of qualitative evidence from 13 companies. At the same time, other researchers have reported investigations of practitioners, and we are interested in how their reports may relate to our evidence. Thus, other research publications can also be treated as a form of qualitative data. In this paper, we review advice on a method, content analysis, that is used to analyse qualitative data. We use content analysis to describe and analyse discussions on software process and software process improvement. We report preliminary findings from an analysis of both the focus group evidence and four publications.

AB - In order to investigate practitioners’ opinions of software process and software process improvement, we have collected a large volume of qualitative evidence from 13 companies. At the same time, other researchers have reported investigations of practitioners, and we are interested in how their reports may relate to our evidence. Thus, other research publications can also be treated as a form of qualitative data. In this paper, we review advice on a method, content analysis, that is used to analyse qualitative data. We use content analysis to describe and analyse discussions on software process and software process improvement. We report preliminary findings from an analysis of both the focus group evidence and four publications.

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 0-7695-2002-2

SP - 326

EP - 335

BT - Procs 2003 Int Symp on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE)

PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

ER -

Persuading developers to buy into software process improvement: a local opinion and empirical evidence

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this