Filters

2016 - 20172
Reset filters

Settings

Publisher: ElsevierSubject: Systematic literature review

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Review
    Citation - WoS: 145
    Citation - Scopus: 189
    Challenges and Best Practices in Industry-Academia Collaborations in Software Engineering: a Systematic Literature Review
    (Elsevier, 2016) Garousi, Vahid; Petersen, Kai; Ozkan, Baris
    Context: The global software industry and the software engineering (SE) academia are two large communities. However, unfortunately, the level of joint industry-academia collaborations in SE is still relatively very low, compared to the amount of activity in each of the two communities. It seems that the two 'camps' show only limited interest/motivation to collaborate with one other. Many researchers and practitioners have written about the challenges, success patterns (what to do, i.e., how to collaborate) and anti-patterns (what not do do) for industry-academia collaborations. Objective: To identify (a) the challenges to avoid risks to the collaboration by being aware of the challenges, (b) the best practices to provide an inventory of practices (patterns) allowing for an informed choice of practices to use when planning and conducting collaborative projects. Method: A systematic review has been conducted. Synthesis has been done using grounded-theory based coding procedures. Results: Through thematic analysis we identified 10 challenge themes and 17 best practice themes. A key outcome was the inventory of best practices, the most common ones recommended in different contexts were to hold regular workshops and seminars with industry, assure continuous learning from industry and academic sides, ensure management engagement, the need for a champion, basing research on real world problems, showing explicit benefits to the industry partner, be agile during the collaboration, and the co-location of the researcher on the industry side. Conclusion: Given the importance of industry-academia collaboration to conduct research of high practical relevance we provide a synthesis of challenges and best practices, which can be used by researchers and practitioners to make informed decisions on how to structure their collaborations. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Review
    Citation - WoS: 65
    Citation - Scopus: 80
    Software Test Maturity Assessment and Test Process Improvement: a Multivocal Literature Review
    (Elsevier, 2017) Garousi, Vahid; Felderer, Michael; Hacaloglu, Tuna
    Context: Software testing practices and processes in many companies are far from being mature and are usually conducted in ad-hoc fashions. Such immature practices lead to various negative outcomes, e.g., ineffectiveness of testing practices in detecting all the defects, and cost and schedule overruns of testing activities. To conduct test maturity assessment (TMA) and test process improvement (TPI) in a systematic manner, various TMA/TPI models and approaches have been proposed. Objective: It is important to identify the state-of-the-art and the-practice in this area to consolidate the list of all various test maturity models proposed by practitioners and researchers, the drivers of TMA/TPI, the associated challenges and the benefits and results of TMA/TPI. Our article aims to benefit the readers (both practitioners and researchers) by providing the most comprehensive survey of the area, to this date, in assessing and improving the maturity of test processes. Method: To achieve the above objective, we have performed a Multivocal Literature Review (MLR) study to find out what we know about TMA/TPI. A MLR is a form of a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) which includes the grey literature (e.g., blog posts and white papers) in addition to the published (formal) literature (e.g., journal and conference papers). We searched the academic literature using the Google Scholar and the grey literature using the regular Google search engine. Results: Our MLR and its results are based on 181 sources, 51 (29%) of which were grey literature and 130 (71%) were formally published sources. By summarizing what we know about TMA/TPI, our review identified 58 different test maturity models and a large number of sources with varying degrees of empirical evidence on this topic. We also conducted qualitative analysis (coding) to synthesize the drivers, challenges and benefits of TMA/TPI from the primary sources. Conclusion: We show that current maturity models and techniques in TMA/TPI provides reasonable advice for industry and the research community. We suggest directions for follow-up work, e.g., using the findings of this MLR in industry-academia collaborative projects and empirical evaluation of models and techniques in the area of TMA/TPI as reported in this article. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.