Methodology Mashups: An Exploration of Processes Used to Maintain Software

References

• Abran, A., and Nguyenkim, H. Measurement of the maintenance process from a demand-based perspective. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 5, 2 (1993), 63-90.
   Google Scholar
• Alkhatib, G. The maintenance problem of application software: An empirical analysis. Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 4, 2 (1992), 83-104.
   Google Scholar
• Andres, H. P., and Zmud, R. W. A contingency approach to software project coordination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 3 (Winter 2001-2), 41-70.
   Google Scholar
• Anquetil, N.; de Oliveira, K. M.; de Sousa, K. D.; and Dias, M. G. B. Software maintenance seen as a knowledge management issue. Information and Software Technology, 49, 5 (2007), 515-529.
   Google Scholar
• April, A., and Abran, A. Software Maintenance Management: Evaluation and Continuous Improvement. Washington, DC: Wiley-IEEE Computer Society, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• April, A.; Hayes, J. H.; Abran, A.; and Dumke, R. Software maintenance maturity model: The software maintenance process model. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 17, 3 (2005), 197-223.
   Google Scholar
• Baddoo, N., and Hall, T. De-motivators for software process improvement: An analysis of practitioners' views. Journal of Systems and Software, 66, 1 (2003), 23-33.
   Google Scholar
• Banker, R. D., and Slaughter, S. Project size and software maintenance productivity: Empirical evidence on economies of scale in software maintenance. In J. I. DeGross, S. Huff, and M. Munro (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Information Systems. New York: AC M Press, 1994, pp. 279-289.
   Google Scholar
• Banker, R. D.; Davis, G. B.; and Slaughter, S. A. Software development practices, software complexity, and software maintenance performance: A field study. Management Science, 44, 4 (1998), 433-450.
   Google Scholar
• Banker, R. D.; Datar, S. M.; Kemerer, C. F.; and Zweig, D. Software errors and software maintenance management. Information Technology and Management, 3, 1 (2002), 25-41.
   Google Scholar
• Barry, E. J.; Kemerer, C. F.; and Slaughter, S. A. How software process automation affects software evolution: A longitudinal empirical analysis. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 19, 1 (2007), 1-31.
   Google Scholar
• Beecham, S.; Baddoo, N.; Hall, T.; Robinson, H.; and Sharp, H. Motivation in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 50, 9 (2008), 860-878.
   Google Scholar
• Boehm, B., and Turner, R. Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE Software, 22, 5 (2005), 30-39.
   Google Scholar
• Borjesson, A., and Mathiassen, L. Successful process implementation. IEEE Software, 21, 4 (2004), 36-44.
   Google Scholar
• Brinkkemper, S.; Saeki, M.; and Harmsen, F. Meta-modeling based assembly techniques for situational method engineering. Information Systems, 24, 3 (1999), 209-228.
   Google Scholar
• Cao, L.; Mohan, K.; Xu, P.; and Ramesh, B. A framework for adapting agile methodologies. European Journal of Information Systems, 18, 4 (2009), 332-343.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, F. K. Y., and Thong, J. Y. L. Acceptance of agile methodologies: A critical review and conceptual framework. Decision Support Systems, 46, 4 (2009), 803-814.
   Google Scholar
• Chapin, N. Software maintenance characteristics and effective management. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 5, 2 (1993), 91-100.
   Google Scholar
• Chapin, N. Software maintenance and organizational health and fitness. In M. Polo, M. Piattini, and F. Ruiz (eds.), Advances in Software Maintenance Management: Technologies and Solutions. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2003, pp. 1-31.
   Google Scholar
• Chapin, N.; Hale, J. E.; Khan, K. M.; Ramil, J. F.; and Wui-Gee, T. Types of software evolution and software maintenance. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 13, 1 (2001), 3-30.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Chow, T., and Cao, D.-B. A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects. Journal of Systems and Software, 81, 6 (2008), 961-971.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, G., and O'Connor, R. Investigating software process in practice: A grounded theory perspective. Journal of Systems and Software, 81, 5 (2008), 772-784.
   Google Scholar
• Cusumano, M. A.; Crandall, W.; MacCormack, A.; and Kemerer, C. F. Critical decisions in software development: Updating the state of the practice. IEEE Software, 26, 5 (2009), 84-87.
   Google Scholar
• Davern, M. J., and Wilkin, C. L. Evolving innovations through design and use. Communications of the ACM, 51, 12 (2008), 133-137.
   Google Scholar
• Dekleva, S. M. The influence of the information systems development approach on maintenance. MIS Quarterly, 16, 3 (1992), 355-372.
   Google Scholar
• de Souza, S. C. B.; Anquetil, N.; and de Oliveira, K. M. A study of the documentation essential to software maintenance. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference on Design of Communications. New York: ACM Press, 2005, pp. 68-75.
   Google Scholar
• Dey, I. Grounding Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Diaz, M., and Sligo, J. How software process improvement helped Motorola. IEEE Software, 14, 5 (1997), 75-81.
   Google Scholar
• Donzelli, P. Tailoring the software maintenance process to better support complex systems evolution projects. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 15, 1 (2003), 27-40.
   Google Scholar
• Dybå, T., and Dingsøyr, T. Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 50, 9-10 (2008), 833-859.
   Google Scholar
• Eierman, M. A., and Dishaw, M. T. The process of software maintenance: A comparison of object-oriented and third-generation development languages. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 19, 1 (2007), 33-47.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, B. Global CIO: Hewlett-Packard attacks innovation gridlock that's killing CIOs. InformationWeek (May 11, 2010) (available at www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/interviews/224701418/
   Google Scholar
• Fogelström, N. D.; Gorschek, T.; Svahnberg, M.; and Olsson, P. The impact of agile principles on market-driven software product development. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 22, 1 (2010), 53-80.
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. Conceptualization: On theory and theorizing using grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1, 2 (2008), 23-38.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, R. L. Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering. Boston: Pearson Education, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Glass, R. L.; Ramesh, V.; and Vessey, I. An analysis of research in computing disciplines. Communications of the ACM, 47, 6 (2004), 89-94.
   Google Scholar
• Green, G. C.; Hevner, A. R.; and Webb Collins, R. The impacts of quality and productivity perceptions on the use of software process improvement innovations. Information and Software Technology, 47, 8 (2005), 543-553.
   Google Scholar
• Guerrero, F., and Eterovic, Y. Adopting the SW-CMM in a small IT organization. IEEE Software, 21, 4 (2004), 29-35.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, B. H., and Kautz, K. Grounded theory applied—Studying information systems development methodologies in practice. In R. H. Sprague (ed.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Highsmith, J., and Cockburn, A. Agile software development: The business of innovation. Computer, 34, 9 (2001), 120-127.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffer, J. A.; George, J.; and Valacich, J. Modern Systems Analysis and Design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Howcroft, D., and Wilson, M. Paradoxes of participatory practices: The Janus role of the systems developer. Information and Organization, 13, 1 (2003), 1-24.
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey, W. S. Managing the Software Process. Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey, W. S. Why don't they practice what we preach? Annals of Software Engineering, 6, 1 (1998), 201-222.
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey, W. S. Three process perspectives: Organizations, teams, and people. Annals of Software Engineering, 14, 1 (2002), 39-72.
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey, W. S.; Snyder, T. R.; and Willis, R. R. Software process improvement at Hughes Aircraft. IEEE Software, 8, 4 (1991), 11-23.
   Google Scholar
• Iivari, J.; Hirschheim, R.; and Klein, H. K. A dynamic framework for classifying information systems development methodologies and approaches. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17, 3 (Winter 2000-1), 179-218.
   Google Scholar
• Iversen, J. H.; Mathiassen, L.; and Nielsen, P. A. Managing risk in software process improvement: An action research approach. MIS Quarterly, 28, 3 (2004), 395-433.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson, I. The Road to the Unified Software Development Process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Jiang, J. J.; Klein, G.; Hwang, H.-G.; Huang, J.; and Hung, S.-Y. An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Information & Management, 41, 3 (2004), 279-288.
   Google Scholar
• Jung, H.-W., and Goldenson, D. R. Evaluating the relationship between process improvement and schedule deviation in software maintenance. Information and Software Technology, 51, 2 (2009), 351-361.
   Google Scholar
• Kautz, K., and Nielsen, P. A. Understanding the implementation of software process improvement innovations in software organizations. Information Systems Journal, 14, 1 (2004), 3-22.
   Google Scholar
• Kemerer, C. F., and Slaughter, S. A. Determinants of software maintenance profiles: An empirical investigation. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 9, 4 (1997), 235-251.
   Google Scholar
• Kemerer, C. F., and Slaughter, S. An empirical approach to studying software evolution. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 25, 4 (1999), 493-509.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchenham, B. A.; Pfleeger, S. L.; Pickard, L. M.; Jones, P. W.; Hoaglin, D. C.; El Emam, K.; and Rosenberg, J. Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28, 8 (2002), 721-734.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchenham, B. A.; Guilherme, H. T.; von Mayrhauser, A.; Niessink, F.; Schneidewind, N. F.; Singer, J.; Takada, S.; Vehvilainen, R.; and Yang, H. Towards an ontology of software maintenance. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 11, 6 (1999), 365-389.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, H. K., and Myers, M. D. A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23, 1 (1999), 67-93.
   Google Scholar
• Ko, A. J.; Myers, B. A.; Coblenz, M. J.; and Aung, H. H. An exploratory study of how developers seek, relate, and collect relevant information during software maintenance tasks. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 32, 12 (2006), 971-987.
   Google Scholar
• Lehman, M. M., and Ramil, J. F. Software evolution and software evolution processes. Annals of Software Engineering, 14, 1 (2002), 275-309.
   Google Scholar
• Lientz, B. P., and Swanson, E. B. Problems in application software maintenance. Communications of the ACM, 24, 11 (1981), 763-769.
   Google Scholar
• Lindvall, M.; Basili, V.; Boehm, B.; Costa, P.; Dangle, K.; Shull, F.; Tesoriero, R.; Williams, L.; and Zelkowitz, M. Empirical findings in agile methods. In D. Wells and L. Williams (eds.), Proceedings of the Second XP Universe and First Agile Universe Conference on Extreme Programming and Agile Methods—XP/Agile Universe 2002. London: Springer, 2002, pp. 81-92.
   Google Scholar
• MacCormack, A.; Kemerer, C. F.; Cusumano, M.; and Crandall, B. Trade-offs between productivity and quality in selecting software development practices. IEEE Software, 20, 5 (2003), 78-85.
   Google Scholar
• Mangalaraj, G.; Mahapatra, R.; and Nerur, S. Acceptance of software process innovations—The case of extreme programming. European Journal of Information Systems, 18, 4 (2009), 344-354.
   Google Scholar
• Markus, L., and Mao, J.-Y. Participation in development and implementation—Updating an old, tired concept for today's IS contexts. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5, 11-12 (2004), 514-544.
   Google Scholar
• Mens, T. History and challenges of software evolution. In T. Mens and S. Demeyer (eds.), Software Evolution. Berlin: Springer, 2008, pp. 1-11.
   Google Scholar
• Mens, T.; Buckley, J.; Zenger, M.; and Rashid, A. Towards a taxonomy of software evolution. Paper presented at the First International Workshop on Unanticipated Software Evolution, Malaga, Spain, June 10-14, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Misra, S. C.; Kumar, V.; and Kumar, U. Identifying some important success factors in adopting agile software development practices. Journal of Systems and Software, 82, 11 (2009), 1869-1890.
   Google Scholar
• Nandhakumar, J., and Avison, D. E. The fiction of methodological development: A field study of information systems development. Information Technology and People, 12, 2 (1999), 176-191.
   Google Scholar
• Narayanan, S.; Balasubramanian, S.; and Swaminathan, J. M. A matter of balance: Specialization, task variety, and individual learning in a software maintenance environment. Management Science, 55, 11 (2009), 1861-1876.
   Google Scholar
• Nerur, S.; Mahapatra, R.; and Mangalaraj, G. Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Communications of the ACM, 48, 5 (2005), 72-78.
   Google Scholar
• Ngwenyama, O., and Nielsen, P. A. Competing values in software process improvement: An assumption analysis of CMM from an organizational cultural perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50, 1 (2003), 100-112.
   Google Scholar
• Nidumolu, S. R. A comparison of the structural contingency and risk-based perspectives on coordination in software-development projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13, 2 (Fall 1996), 77-113.
   Google Scholar
• Niessink, F., and van Vliet, H. Software maintenance from a service perspective. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 12, 2 (2000), 103-120.
   Google Scholar
• Palvia, P.; Patula, A.; and Nosek, J. Problems and issues in application software maintenance management. Journal of Information Technology Management, 6, 3 (1995), 17-28.
   Google Scholar
• Park, J.-Y., and Kim, J. S. The impact of IS sourcing type on service quality and maintenance efforts. Information & Management, 42, 2 (2005), 261-274.
   Google Scholar
• Paulk, M. C.; Weber, C. V.; Curtis, B.; and Chrissis, M. B. The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving Software Process. Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Pfleeger, S. L., and Atlee, J. M. Software Engineering: Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Polo, M.; Piattini, M.; and Ruiz, F. Using a qualitative research method for building a software maintenance methodology. Software: Practice and Experience, 32, 13 (2002), 1239-1260.
   Google Scholar
• Polo, M.; Piattini, M.; and Ruiz, F. Advances in Software Maintenance Management: Technologies and Solutions. Hershey, PA: Idea Group, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Polo, M.; Piattini, M.; Ruiz, F.; and Calero, C. MANTEMA: A complete rigorous methodology for supporting maintenance based on the ISO/IEC 12207 standard. In Proceedings of the Third European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 1999, pp. 178-181.
   Google Scholar
• Ramesh, B.; Cao, L.; Mohan, K.; and Xu, P. Can distributed software development be agile? Communications of the ACM, 49, 10 (2006), 41-46.
   Google Scholar
• Rombach, D.; Münch, J.; Ocampo, A.; Humphrey, W. S.; and Burton, D. Teaching disciplined software development. Journal of Systems and Software, 81, 5 (2008), 747-763.
   Google Scholar
• Ruiz, F.; Vizcaino, A.; Piattini, M.; and Garcia, F. An ontology for the management of software maintenance projects. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 14, 3 (2004), 323-349.
   Google Scholar
• Shaft, T. M., and Vessey, I. The role of cognitive fit in the relationship between software comprehension and modification. MIS Quarterly, 30, 1 (2006), 29-55.
   Google Scholar
• Stachour, P., and Collier-Brown, D. You don't know jack about software maintenance. Communications of the ACM, 52, 11 (2009), 54-58.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, G. E., and Oman, P. W. Software maintenance management strategies: Observations from the field. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 9, 6 (1997), 365-378.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, G. E.; Oman, P.; Skillicorn, A.; and Ameele, A. An examination of the effects of requirements changes on software maintenance releases. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice, 11, 5 (1999), 293-309.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, H., and Host, M. Introducing an agile process in a software maintenance and evolution organization. In Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Software Maintenance and Engineering. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 2005, pp. 256-264.
   Google Scholar
• Swanson, E. B., and Beath, C. M. Departmentalization in software development and maintenance. Communications of the ACM, 33, 6 (1990), 658-667.
   Google Scholar
• Truex, D.; Baskerville, R.; and Travis, J. Amethodical systems development: The deferred meaning of systems development methods. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 10, 1 (2000), 53-79.
   Google Scholar
• Urquhart, C. The evolving nature of grounded theory method: The case of the information systems discipline. In A. Bryant and K. Charmaz (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. London: Sage, 2007, pp. 339-359.
   Google Scholar
• Urquhart, C.; Lehmann, H.; and Myers, M. D. Putting the "theory" back into grounded theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Information Systems Journal, 20, 4 (2010), 357-381.
   Google Scholar
• Vavpotic, D., and Bajec, M. An approach for concurrent evaluation of technical and social aspects of software development methodologies. Information and Software Technology, 51, 2 (2009), 528-545.
   Google Scholar
• Von Mayrhauser, A., and Vans, A. M. Identification of dynamic comprehension processes during large scale maintenance. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 22, 6 (1996), 424-437.
   Google Scholar
• Walsham, G. Interpretive case studies in IS research. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 2 (1995), 74-81.
   Google Scholar
• Walsham, G. Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems, 15, 3 (2006), 320-330.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, D., and Basili, V. Evaluating software development by analysis of changes: Some data from the software engineering laboratory. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 11, 2 (2005), 157-167.
   Google Scholar
• Xu, P., and Balasubramaniam, R. Software process tailoring: An empirical investigation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24, 2 (Fall 2007), 293-328.
   Google Scholar
• Yeh, D., and Jeng, J.-H. An empirical study of the influence of departmentalization and organizational position on software maintenance. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 14, 1 (2002), 65-82.
   Google Scholar