|
| This Article | ||
| ||
| Share | ||
| Bibliographic References | ||
| Add to: | ||
 Digg  Furl  Spurl  Blink  Simpy  Google  Del.icio.us  Y!MyWeb | ||
| Search | ||
| ||
| ASCII Text | x | ||
| Carolyn B. Seaman, Victor R. Basili, "Communication and Organization: An Empirical Study of Discussion in Inspection Meetings," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 559-572, July, 1998. | |||
| BibTex | x | ||
| @article{ 10.1109/32.708569, author = {Carolyn B. Seaman and Victor R. Basili}, title = {Communication and Organization: An Empirical Study of Discussion in Inspection Meetings}, journal ={IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering}, volume = {24}, number = {7}, issn = {0098-5589}, year = {1998}, pages = {559-572}, doi = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/32.708569}, publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, address = {Los Alamitos, CA, USA}, } | |||
| RefWorks Procite/RefMan/Endnote | x | ||
| TY - JOUR JO - IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering TI - Communication and Organization: An Empirical Study of Discussion in Inspection Meetings IS - 7 SN - 0098-5589 SP559 EP572 EPD - 559-572 A1 - Carolyn B. Seaman, A1 - Victor R. Basili, PY - 1998 KW - Communication KW - defects KW - empirical study KW - inspections KW - organizational structure KW - process KW - productivity. VL - 24 JA - IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering ER - | |||
Abstract—This paper describes an empirical study that addresses the issue of communication among members of a software development organization. In particular, data was collected concerning code inspections in one software development project. The question of interest is whether or not organizational structure (the network of relationships between developers) has an effect on the amount of effort expended on communication between developers. The independent variables in this study are various attributes of the organizational structure in which the inspection participants work. The dependent variables are measures of the communication effort expended in various parts of the code inspection process, focusing on the inspection meeting. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used, including participant observation, structured interviews, generation of hypotheses from field notes, statistical tests of relationships, and interpretation of results with qualitative anecdotes. The study results show that past and present working relationships between inspection participants affect the amount of meeting time spent in different types of discussion, thus affecting the overall inspection meeting length. Reporting relationships and physical proximity also have an effect. The contribution of the study is a set of well-supported hypotheses for further investigation.
[1] S.R. Barley, "The Alignment of Technology and Structure through Roles and Networks," Administative Science Quarterly, vol. 35, pp. 61-103, 1990.
[2] K.V. Bourgeois, "Process Insights from a Large-Scale Software Inspections Data Analysis," CrossTalk, Oct. 1996.
[3] L. Briand, W. Melo, C. Seaman, and V. Basili, "Characterizing and Assessing a Large-Scale Software Maintenance Organization," Proc. 17th Int'l Conf. Software Eng., pp. 133-143,Seattle, Wash., Apr. 1995.
[4] B.G. Cain and J.O. Coplien, "A Role-Based Empirical Process Modeling Environment," Proc. Second Int'l Conf. Software Process,Berlin, Feb. 1993.
[5] B. Curtis, H. Krasner, and N. Iscoe, "A Field Study of the Software Design Process for Large Systems," Comm. ACM, vol. 31, no. 11, pp. 1,268-1,287, 1988.
[6] K.M. Eisenhardt, "Building Theories from Case Study Research," Academy of Management Rev., vol. 14, pp. 532-550, 1989.
[7] M.E. Fagan, "Design and Code Inspections to Reduce Errors in Program Development," IBM Systems J., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 219-248, 1976.
[8] J.R. Galbraith, Organization Design. Addison-Wesley, 1977.
[9] T. Gilb and D. Graham, Software Inspection, Addison-Wesley, 1993.
[10] J.F. Gilgun, "Definitions, Methodologies, and Methods in Qualitative Family Research," Qualitative Methods in Family Research. Sage, 1992.
[11] B.G. Glaser and A.L. Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing, 1967.
[12] H. Krasner, B. Curtis, and N. Iscoe, “Communication Breakdowns and Boundary Spanning Activities on Large Programming Projects,” Proc. Empirical Studies of Programmers: Second Workshop, pp. 47-64, Washington, D.C., G.M. Olson, S. Sheppard, and E. Soloway, eds. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing, Dec. 1987.
[13] R.E. Kraut and L.A. Streeter, "Coordination in Software Development," Comm. ACM, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1995, pp. 69-81.
[14] Y.S. Lincoln and E.G. Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, 1985.
[15] J.G. March and H.A. Simon, Organizations.New York: John Wiley&Sons, 1958.
[16] D.E. Perry, N.A. Staudenmayer, and L.G. Votta, "People, Organizations, and Process Improvement." IEEE Software, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 36-45, 1994.
[17] G.L. Rein, "Organization Design Viewed as a Group Process Using Coordination Technology," Technical Report CT-039-92, MCC, Feb. 1992.
[18] C.B. Seaman, "Organizational Issues in Software Development: An Empirical Study of Communication," PhD thesis, Univ. of Maryland at College Park, 1996.
[19] C.B. Seaman, "Communication Costs in Code and Design Reviews: An Empirical Study." Proc. CASCON'96, CD-ROM version, Toronto, Canada, Nov. 1996. IBM Canada Ltd. Laboratory Centre for Advanced Studies and National Research Council of Canada.
[20] S.J. Taylor and R. Bogdan, Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods.New York: John Wiley&Sons, 1984.
[21] E. Yu and J. Mylopoulos, "Understanding 'Why' in Software Process Modeling, Analysis, and Design," Proc. 16th Int'l Conf. Software Engineering, IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos, Calif., 1994, pp. 159-168.