Compare View

switch
from
...
to
 
Commits (5)
Showing 5 changed files   Show diff stats
oss2018/content/03-methods.tex
  Diff comments   View file @a69f0d8
... ... @@ -23,33 +23,34 @@ repository.
23 23 \subsection{The case study}
24 24  
25 25 The project to evolve the SPB portal was a partnership between government and
26   -academia held between 2014 and 2016 \cite{meirelles2017spb}. The old version of
  26 +academia held between 2014 and 2016~\cite{meirelles2017spb}. The old version of
27 27 SPB suffered from maintenance problems and design-reality gaps. In this sense,
28   -The Ministry of Planning (MPOG) decided to join the University of Brasília
29   -(UnB) and the University of São Paulo (USP) to develop a new platform. This
30   -platform had as its primary requirement to be based on existing FLOSS projects
31   -and integrate multiple systems into one, providing the end user with a unified
32   -experience.
  28 +the Ministry of Planning (MPOG) decided to join the University of Brasília
  29 +(UnB) and the University of São Paulo (USP) to develop a new platform.
  30 +This platform had the primary requirement to be based on existing FLOSS
  31 +projects and integrate multiple systems into one, providing the end user with a
  32 +unified experience.
33 33  
34 34 In short, the SPB portal evolved into a Collaborative Development Environment
35   -(CDE) \cite{booch2003}. It was a novelty in the context of the Brazilian
36   -government, due to the technologies employed and its diverse features. The
37   -portal includes social networking, mailing lists, version control system, and
38   -source code quality monitoring. All software is integrated using a
39   -system-of-systems framework \cite{meirelles2017spb}.
  35 +(CDE)\cite{booch2003}. It was a novelty in the context of the Brazilian
  36 +government, due to the technologies employed and its diverse features, which
  37 +includes social networking, mailing lists, version control system, and source
  38 +code quality monitoring. All software is integrated using a system-of-systems
  39 +framework \cite{meirelles2017spb}. These characteristics led the project to
  40 +interact with different FLOSS projects and communities.
40 41  
41 42 The platform development took place at the Advanced Laboratory of Production,
42 43 Research, and Innovation in Software Engineering (LAPPIS/UnB) and the FLOSS
43   -Competence Center at USP (CCSL/USP). Undergraduate interns, IT professionals and
44   -professors formed a partially distributed development team. While interns and
45   -professors worked in-person, most IT professionals worked remotely. Their
46   -activities followed the workflow of biweekly sprints and 4-month releases.
  44 +Competence Center at USP (CCSL/USP), both with experience in FLOSS development.
  45 +Undergraduate interns, IT professionals, and professors formed a partially
  46 +distributed development team. Their activities followed the workflow
  47 +of biweekly sprints and 4-month releases.
47 48  
48   -On the managerial aspect, at the project
49   -beginning, the collaboration management and strategic discussions happened only
50   -once a month, when project leaders and MPOG directors met in person at the
51   -ministry's headquarters. Table~\ref{tab:gov-academia-diff} summarizes the
52   -organizational differences in both involved sides.
  49 +On the managerial aspect, at the project beginning, the collaboration
  50 +management and strategic discussions happened only once a month, when project
  51 +leaders and MPOG directors met in person at the ministry's headquarters.
  52 +Table~\ref{tab:gov-academia-diff} summarizes the organizational differences in
  53 +both involved sides.
53 54  
54 55 \vspace*{-.5cm}
55 56  
... ... @@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ organizational differences in both involved sides.
60 61 \resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{%
61 62 \begin{tabular}{m{4.3cm}!{\color{white}\vrule}m{7cm}!{\color{white}\vrule}m{8cm}}
62 63 \rowcolor[HTML]{c0d6e4}
63   -\textbf{Collaboration peaces} & \textbf{Academia} & \textbf{Goverment} \
  64 +\textbf{Characteristics} & \textbf{Academia} & \textbf{Goverment} \
64 65 \rowcolor[HTML]{f2f2f2}
65 66 \textbf{Responsibilities} & Platform development activites & Contracts and collaboration management \\
66 67 \rowcolor[HTML]{fafafa}
... ... @@ -73,27 +74,35 @@ organizational differences in both involved sides.
73 74 \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbf{Management} \textbf{approaches}\end{tabular} & FLOSS practices and Agile values & Mindset from RUP, CMMI, and PMBOK \\
74 75 \end{tabular}%
75 76 }
  77 +\vspace*{5pt}
76 78 \caption{Differences between academia and government sides.}
77 79 \label{tab:gov-academia-diff}
78 80 \end{table}
79 81  
80   -\vspace*{-1cm}
81   -
82   -During the project progress, this workflow proved to be inefficient. Conflicts
83   -between the internal management processes and differences in pace and goals of
84   -each institution were compromising the platform development. To improve the
85   -project management process and reducing the mismatching between government and
86   -academia, professors, with the senior developers' collaboration, incrementally
87   -employed a set of best practices based on FLOSS and agile values. Throughout
88   -the project, the development leaders made decisions in a non-systematic way to
89   -promote the usage of these techniques. In this paper, we analyzed and codified
90   -these decisions and how they favored the collaboration progress.
  82 +\vspace*{-.8cm}
  83 +
  84 +During the course of the project, we were unable to fully extract all the
  85 +possible benefits from this workflow. Conflicts between the internal
  86 +management processes and differences in pace and goals of each institution were
  87 +compromising the platform development. To improve the project management
  88 +process and reducing the mismatch between government and academia, professors,
  89 +with the senior developers' collaboration, incrementally employed a set of best
  90 +practices based on FLOSS and agile values.
  91 +
  92 +Although the government initiative to work with the university, they had a
  93 +natural barrier to accept the non-traditional development approaches. The
  94 +development leaders made decisions in a non-systematic way to promote the usage
  95 +of FLOSS and agile techniques in such way that the government understood the
  96 +value of the collaboration. In this scenario, the SPB project became a proper
  97 +case to comprehend the processes harmonization between government and
  98 +university. In this paper, we analyzed and codified the set of project
  99 +decisions and how they favored the collaboration progress.
91 100  
92 101 \subsection{Survey, Interview and Data Collection}
93 102  
94 103 We separated the project team into three groups: undergraduate interns, IT
95 104 professionals (senior developers and designers), and MPOG analysts. For the
96   -first two we sent online questionnaires, and for the last one, we conducted
  105 +first two, we sent online questionnaires, and for the last ones, we conducted
97 106 2-hour interviews. Table \ref{survey-table} presents the details of these
98 107 processes.
99 108  
... ... @@ -123,6 +132,7 @@ processes.
123 132 \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}\textbf{Experience} \\ \textbf{background}\end{tabular} & 43\% of the interns had the SPB project as their first contact with FLOSS & 11 years of experience; worked in at least 5 companies; participated in 4 to 80 distinct projects; 86\%of them had some background with FLOSS before the SPB project & more than 7 years working in the government; SPB project represented their first experience of government-academia collaboration \\
124 133 \end{tabular}%
125 134 }
  135 +\vspace*{3pt}
126 136 \caption{Surveying the project participants}
127 137 \label{survey-table}
128 138 \end{table}
... ... @@ -132,4 +142,4 @@ processes.
132 142 Finally, we analyzed the data from the central project repository considering
133 143 all the issues and commits. From April 2015 to June 2016, 59 distinct authors
134 144 opened 879 issues, 64 different users made the total of 4,658 comments. The
135   -development team made 3,256 commits in this abovementioned repository.
  145 +development team made 3,256 commits in this above-mentioned repository.
... ...
oss2018/content/04-results.tex
  Diff comments   View file @a69f0d8
... ... @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ the use of the system homologated most of its features. From the moment we
65 65 began to use it for developing, this validation was constant. We felt confident
66 66 in the code produced''}.
67 67  
68   -The abovementioned decision also collaborated to meet the government's demand
  68 +The above-mentioned decision also collaborated to meet the government's demand
69 69 for meticulous documentation of the software design and stages of development
70 70 without bureaucratizing or modifying the development process. The usage of the
71 71 platform for project team management conducted \textbf{the organic production
... ...
oss2018/content/05-discussion.tex
  Diff comments   View file @a69f0d8
... ... @@ -2,12 +2,11 @@
2 2 \label{sec:discussion}
3 3  
4 4 Our results reveal a set of nine management practices successfully employed in
5   -abovementioned case. We analyzed unsystematic decisions made during a 30-month
  5 +above-mentioned case. We analyzed unsystematic decisions made during a 30-month
6 6 collaborative project and identified three macro-decisions that harmonized the
7   -differences of the management processes of each organization. We evidenced from
8   -data collection, and responses of the members of both sides to the
9   -questionnaires and interviews, the benefits obtained through the adoption of
10   -this empirical method. The Table \ref{practices-table} summarizes
  7 +differences of the management processes of each organization. We collected
  8 +evidence from the gathered data that demonstrates the benefits obtained with the
  9 +adoption of a collection of practices. Table \ref{practices-table} summarizes
11 10 macro-decisions, practices, and benefits.
12 11  
13 12 \vspace*{-.5cm}
... ... @@ -81,30 +80,30 @@ macro-decisions, practices, and benefits.
81 80 \end{itemize}\\
82 81 \end{tabular}%
83 82 }
  83 +\vspace*{3pt}
84 84 \caption{Empirical SPB management decisions and its benefits.}
85 85 \label{practices-table}
86 86 \end{table}
87 87  
88 88 \vspace*{-1cm}
89 89  
90   -The results of this current work corroborate the lessons learned in our
91   -previous work on studying the SPB project case \cite{meirelles2017spb}.
92   -Evidence from the data collected, responses to questionnaires, and interviews
93   -reinforce what has been reported by the academic coordination of the project,
94   -adding the point of views of government and other roles involved on the
95   -academic side. In short, the government staff took time to understand how
96   -collaboration works and to realize that the project was not a client-executor
97   -relationship and both organizations were at the same hierarchical level in the
98   -work plan.
  90 +The results presented here corroborate the lessons learned in our previous work
  91 +on studying the SPB project case \cite{meirelles2017spb}. Evidence from the data
  92 +collected, responses to questionnaires, and interviews reinforce what has been
  93 +reported by the academic coordination of the project, adding the point of views
  94 +of government and other roles involved on the academic side. In short, the
  95 +government staff took time to understand how collaboration works and to realize
  96 +that the project should not assume a client-executor relationship, but rather
  97 +that both organizations were at the same hierarchical level in the work plan.
99 98  
100   -The decisions, practices, and benefits presented in the Table
  99 +The decisions, practices, and benefits presented presented in Table
101 100 \ref{practices-table} should be evaluated and used in contexts with more
102 101 substantial plurality and diversity of government stakeholders. This study has
103   -a few obvious limitations. Firstly, we point out the lack of communication
  102 +a few obvious limitations. First, we point out the lack of communication
104 103 records and low traceability of the management data referring to the first
105   -phase of the project. Secondly, we consider a drawback the hiatus between the
  104 +phase of the project. Second, we consider a drawback the hiatus between the
106 105 completion of the project and the conduction of interviews and questionnaires,
107   -since we rely on the memory of the interviewees to rescue the events. Lastly,
108   -the current situation of the respondents, such as their current working midset,
109   -may also alter their perception on the on the topics addressed in the
110   -questionnaire and consequently their responses.
  106 +since we rely on the memory of the interviewees to rescue the events. Finally,
  107 +the current situation of the respondents, such as their current working mindset,
  108 +may also alter their perception on the topics addressed in the questionnaire and
  109 +consequently their responses.
... ...
oss2018/content/06-conclusion.tex
  Diff comments   View file @a69f0d8
1 1 \section{Conclusion}
2 2 \label{sec:conclusion}
3 3  
4   -Organizational culture is built and reinforced every life year of a large-size
  4 +Organizational culture is built and reinforced every life year of a large
5 5 organization. These cultural values reflect on the internal management
6 6 processes and the norms of communication among its members. In the context of
7 7 software development projects, each institution adopts development methods that
8 8 best meet its managerial procedures and organizational routines. When two
9   -large-size organizations decide to develop a solution collaboratively, the
  9 +large organizations decide to develop a solution collaboratively, the
10 10 development methods and workflow of one may conflict with the interests of the
11 11 other. In a case of government-academia collaboration, conciliating their
12 12 different management processes is crucial, since the poor and unadaptable
13   -management could lead the project to fail, resulting in the waste of
14   -population-funded resources.
  13 +management could lead the project to fail, resulting in the waste of tax-payer
  14 +resources.
15 15  
16 16 In this study, we investigated the management method employed at the SPB portal
17 17 project, a partnership between the Brazilian government and universities. As a
... ... @@ -25,17 +25,17 @@ examined the SPB project and identified three macro-decisions taken by the
25 25 academic coordinators that drove them to intuitively and unsystematically adopt
26 26 nine FLOSS and agile best practices in the development process.
27 27  
28   -The interviewed responses allowed us to understand how FLOSS and agile
29   -practices have benefited the people and project management. Based on that, we
  28 +The interviews responses allowed us to understand how FLOSS and agile
  29 +practices have benefited the project management. Based on that, we
30 30 answered our second research question \textit{``What practices favor effective
31   -team management in government-academia collaborative projects?''}, making to
32   -explicit 14 benefits obtained from the use of the nine best practices,
33   -presented in Table \ref{practices-table}.
  31 +team management in government-academia collaborative projects?''}, making
  32 +explicit 14 benefits obtained from the use of the nine best practices, presented
  33 +in Table \ref{practices-table}.
34 34  
35 35 Finally, we collected a significant amount of data and testimonials related to
36 36 the teaching of software engineering. We consider the studied project an
37 37 educational case, an example of teaching FLOSS and agile techniques applied to
38 38 real-world software development. As future work, we intend to analyze this
39   -collected information to propose improvements in education methodologies of
40   -software engineering undergraduate students as well.
  39 +collected information to propose improvements in educational methods for
  40 +teaching software engineering to undergraduate students as well.
41 41  
... ...
oss2018/spb-oss-2018.bib
  Diff comments   View file @a69f0d8
... ... @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@
143 143 @inproceedings{melo2013agileBr,
144 144 author = {Melo, Claudia and Santos, Viviane and Katayama, Eduardo and Corbucci, Hugo and Prikladnicki, Rafael and Goldman, Alfredo and Kon, Fabio},
145 145 year = {2013},
146   - title = {The evolution of agile software development in Brazil},
  146 + title = "{The evolution of agile software development in Brazil}",
147 147 volume = {19},
148 148 booktitle = {Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society}
149 149 }
... ... @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@
170 170 author = {Chookittikul, Wajee and Kourik, Janet and E. Maher, Peter},
171 171 year = {2011},
172 172 pages = {239-244},
173   - title = {Reducing the Gap between Academia and Industry: The Case for Agile Methods in Thailand},
  173 + title = "{Reducing the gap between academia and industry: The case for agile methods in Thailand}",
174 174 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2011 Eighth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations}
175 175 }
176 176  
... ...