Engineering of quality requirements as perceived by near-shore development centers' architects in eastern Europe: the hole in the whole

ABSTRACT

Context: To software architects (SAs), the quality requirements (QRs) to a software system are key to designing the software architecture. However, understanding SAs' roles in the QRs engineering activities only recently became a topic in empirical requirements engineering research and very little is still known about QRs engineering from SAs' in large and distributed projects. Goal: This exploratory study aims at explicating how SAs are involved in engineering QRs in a specific distributed development setting, namely in organizations that distribute software development activities to closely located business units, known as near-shore development centres (NDCs), and in a specific geographic zone, namely Eastern Europe. Method: Based on interviews with 16 practitioners working on large projects in NDCs, we explicate the participation and involvement of NDCs' architects in QRs tasks. Results: We found that SAs from NDCs (i) are actively involved in QRs documentation and validation, (ii) are relatively passive participants in QRs elicitation and prioritization, and (iii) are not at all involved in QRs negotiation. Perhaps, our most surprising finding is that NDCs may often have economic incentives to misalign with onshore QRs practices. Conclusions: We explicated QRs practices, compared them to previously published ones, and found implications for both researchers and practitioners. Though, our results are preliminary, as they are from an exploratory study.

References

1. Carmel, E. and Abbott, P., 2007. Why 'nearshore' means that distance matters. Commun. ACM 50(10): 40--46.
2. Ebling, T., Audy, L., Prikladnicki, R. 2009. A systematic literature review of requirements engineering in distributed software development. In Proc. ICEIS (Milano).
3. Schmid, K. 2014. Challenges and solutions in global requirements engineering -- A literature survey. In Proc. SWQD (Vienna, Austria), 85--99.
4. Bass, L., Clements, P., and Kazman, R. 2003. Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley, USA.
5. Seddon P. and Scheepers, P. 2011. Towards the improved treatment of generalization of knowledge claims in IS research: Drawing general conclusions from samples. European Journal on IS, 21, 6--21.
6. Poort, E. R., Key, A, de With, P. H. N., and van Vliet, H. 2012. Issues dealing with non-functional requirements across the contractual divide. In Proc. WICSA/ECSA (Helsinki).
7. Poort, E. R., Martens, N., van de Weerd, I., and van Vliet, H. 2012. How architects see non-functional requirements: Beware of modifiability. In Proc. REFSQ (Essen, Germany).
8. Ameller, D. and Franch, D. 2010. How do software architects consider non-functional Requirements: A survey. In Proc. REFSQ (Essen, Germany), 276--277.
9. Ameller, D., Ayala, C., Cabot, J., and Franch, X. 2012. How do software architects consider non-functional requirements: An exploratory study, In Proc. RE Conf. (Chicago, USA).
10. Daneva, M., Buglione, L., and Herrmann, A. 2013. Software architects' experiences of quality requirements: What we know and what we do not know? In Proc. REFSQ (Essen).
11. ECONOMIST (2005) The rise of nearshoring. The Economist 377(8455), 65--67.
12. Verner, J. and Evanco, W. 2005. In-house software development: What project management practices lead to success? IEEE Software 22, 1, 86--93.
13. Bentsson-Svensson, R., Höst, M., Regnell, B. 2010. Managing quality requirements: A systematic review. In Proc. EUROMICRO-SEAA (Lille, France), 261--268.
14. Sillaber, C. and Breu, R. 2014. The impact of knowledge sharing platforms in distributed requirements engineering scenarios: A systematic review. In Proc. KMO (Kaohsiung).
15. Vivian, R., Huzita, E., Leal, G., and Steinmacher, A. 2011. Context-awareness on software artefacts in distributed software development: A systematic review. In Proc. CRISG (Paraty, Brazil), 30--44.
16. Bjarnason, E. 2013. Distances between requirements engineering and later software development activities: A systematic map. In Proc. REFSQ (Essen, Germany).
17. Yin, R. K. 2008. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, Thousands Oaks, USA.
18. King, N. and Horrock, C. 2010. Interviews in Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousands Oaks, USA.
19. Saldana, J. 2010. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Sage, Thousand Oaks, USA.
20. Charmaz, K. 2007. Constructing Grounded Theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks, USA.
21. Nicholson, B. and Sahay, S. 2004. Embedded knowledge and offshore software development. Information and Organization 14, 4, 329--365.
22. Levina, N. and Vaast E., 2006. Innovating or Doing as Told? Status Differences and Overlapping Boundaries in Offshore Collaboration. MIS Quarterly 32(2): 307--332.
23. Barki, H. and Hartwick, J. 1994. Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Quarterly 18, 1, 59--82.
24. Keil, M., Rai, A., and Liu, S. 2012. How user risk and requirements risk moderate the effects of formal and informal control on the performance in IT projects. European Journal on IS 22, 650--672.
25. Runeson P. and Höst, M. 2009. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering 14, 2, 131--164.
26. Heesch, van, U. and Avgeriou, P. 2011. Mature Architecting - A Survey about the Reasoning Process of Professional Architects, In Proc. WICSA(Boulder, CO). 260--269.
27. Ropponen, J. and Lyytinen, K., 2000. Components of Software Development Risk: How to Address Them? A Project Manager Survey. IEEE Trans. SE. 26(2): 98--112.
28. British Standard BS ISO/IEC 25030:2007: Software engineering --- Software Product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) --- Quality requirements.
29. IEEE: SWEBOK V3.0 Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge, 2014, www.swebok.org
30. http://v-modell.iabg.de/v-modell-xt-html-english/
31. Regnell, B., Berntsson-Svensson, R., and Wnuk, K. 2008. Can we beat the complexity of very large-scale requirements engineering?. In Proc. REFSQ (Essen, Germany).

Index Terms

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Designing software

      • Requirements analysis