CFP last date
20 January 2025
Call for Paper
February Edition
IJCA solicits high quality original research papers for the upcoming February edition of the journal. The last date of research paper submission is 20 January 2025

Submit your paper
Know more
The week's pick
Responsive image
SFLA-Based Line Balancing and Task Optimization in Master-Slave Controlled Hanger Transportation Systems for Garment Production

Duc Hoang Nguyen
Random Articles
Reseach Article

Root Causes and Reduction Techniques for Rework in Global Software Development

by Ritu Jain, Ugrasen Suman
journal cover thumbnail

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 183 - Number 43
Year of Publication: 2021
Authors: Ritu Jain, Ugrasen Suman
10.5120/ijca2021921840

Ritu Jain, Ugrasen Suman . Root Causes and Reduction Techniques for Rework in Global Software Development. International Journal of Computer Applications. 183, 43 ( Dec 2021), 40-44. DOI=10.5120/ijca2021921840

@article{ 10.5120/ijca2021921840,
author = { Ritu Jain, Ugrasen Suman },
title = { Root Causes and Reduction Techniques for Rework in Global Software Development },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { Dec 2021 },
volume = { 183 },
number = { 43 },
month = { Dec },
year = { 2021 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 40-44 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume183/number43/32223-2021921840/ },
doi = { 10.5120/ijca2021921840 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-07T01:19:36.162637+05:30
%A Ritu Jain
%A Ugrasen Suman
%T Root Causes and Reduction Techniques for Rework in Global Software Development
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 183
%N 43
%P 40-44
%D 2021
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Global software development (GSD) is a trend adopted by numerous software companies to reduce development cost and time. However, potential cost and time savings are seldom realized due to unprecedented challenges in GSD environment. These challenges often hamper software development and project management activities. Moreover, they led to confusions, misinterpretations and conflicting perceptions regarding the software to be built, which in turn induce excessive rework. This rework significantly wastes lots of time as well as resources and may doom projects to fail. Rework in GSD setting can be reduced, if root causes of rework can be identified and thus avoided for GSD. However, there is paucity of research on this aspect. Thus, in this paper, root causes of rework in GSD are investigated. Techniques to reduce rework for GSD are also suggested. A metric for verifying the understanding score of distributed teams is also proposed. This study would aware practitioners and researchers about the causes of rework and its reduction techniques for GSD setting.

References
  1. Jain, R., Suman, U. 2015. A Systematic Literature Review on Global Software Development Life Cycle. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 40(2), (2015), 1-14.
  2. Espinosa, J.A., Carmel, E. 2003. The Impact of Time Separation on Coordination in Global Software Teams: A Conceptual Foundation. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 8(4), (2003), 249-266.
  3. Babar, M. A., Zahedi, M.2012. Global Software Development: A Review of the State-Of The-Art (2007- 2011). IT University Technical Report Series. IT University of Copenhagen.
  4. Herbsleb, J.D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T.A., Grinter, R.E. 2001. An Empirical Study of Global Software Development: Distance and Speed. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE '01), pp. 81-90. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA.
  5. Fairley, R.E., Willshire, M.J. 2005. Iterative Rework: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Ieee Computer. 38(9), (Sep. 2005), 34-41.
  6. Ramdoo, V., Huzooree, G. 2015. Strategies to Reduce Rework in Software Development on an Organisation in Mauritius. International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications. 6(5), (2015), 9-20.
  7. Schwalbe, K. 2015. Information Technology Project Management. 8th edn. Cengage Learning.
  8. Boehm, B.W., Papaccio, P.N.1988. Understanding and Controlling Software Costs. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 14(10), (1988), 1462-1477.
  9. Boehm, B., Basili, V.R. 2001. Software Defect Reduction Top 10 List. Ieee Software. 34(1), (2001), 135-137.
  10. Gopal, A., Mukhopadhyay T., Krishnan, M.S. 2002. The role of software processes and communication in offshore software development. Commun. ACM. 45(4), (2002), 193-200.
  11. Alahyari, H., Gorschek, T.,Svensson, R. B. 2019. An exploratory study of waste in software development organizations using agile or lean approaches: A multiple case study at 14 organizations. Information and Software Technology, 105, (2019), 78-94.
  12. Hoda, R., Murugesan, L. K.2016. Multi-level agile project management challenges: A self-organizing team perspective. J. Syst. Softw. 117, (2016), 245-257.
  13. Jain, R., Suman, U. 2018. A Project Management Framework for Global Software Development. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 43(1), (2018), 1-10.
  14. Jain, R., Suman, U. 2017. An Adaptive Agile Process Model for Global Software Development. International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering. 9(6), (2017), 436-445.
  15. Browning, T.R., Eppinger, S.D. 2002. Modeling the Impact of Process Architecture on Cost and Schedule Risk in Product Development. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 49(4), (2002), 428-442.
  16. Verner, J.M., Brereton, O.P., Kitchenham, B.A., Turner, M., and Niazi, M. 2014. Risks and Risk Mitigation in Global Software Development: A Tertiary Study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 56 (1), (2014), 54-78.
  17. Coram, M., Bohner, S. 2005. The Impact of Agile Methods on Software Project Management. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2005), 363-370.
  18. Nord, R.L., Ozkaya, I., and Sangwan, R.S. 2012. Making Architecture Visible to Improve Flow Management in Lean Software Development. IEEE Softw. 29(5), (2012), 33-39.
  19. Fairley, R.E., and Willshire, M.J. 2017. Better Now Than Later: Managing Technical Debt in Systems Development. Ieee Computer, 50(5), (2017), 80-87.
  20. Nelson, R.R. 2007. IT Project Management: Infamous Failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best Practices. MIS Quart Exec. 6(2), (2007), 67-78.
  21. Nord, R.L., Ozkaya, I., Kruchten, P., and Gonzalez-Rojas, M. 2012. In Search of a Metric for Managing Architectural Technical Debt. In Proceedings of the Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture and European Conference on Software Architecture. WICSA-ECSA '12, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2012), 91-100.
  22. Brown, N., Cai, Y., Guo, Y. et al. 2010. Managing technical debt in software-reliant systems. InProceedings of the FSE/SDP workshop on Future of software engineering research FoSER '10, ACM, NY, USA, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA (2010), 47-52.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Global Software development Rework Causes Reduction Techniques

Powered by PhDFocusTM