Sandun Dasanayake, Jouni Markkula, Sanja Aaramaa, Markku Oivo M-Group, University of Oulu 29.09.2015 Software Architecture Decision-Making Practices and Challenges: An Industrial Case Study 24th Australasian Software Engineering Conference – ASWEC’15 Preprint of the Article: http:// goo.gl/7Ay6nE
14
Embed
Software Architecture Decision-Making Practices and Challenges: An Industrial Case Study
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Sandun Dasanayake, Jouni Markkula, Sanja Aaramaa, Markku OivoM-Group, University of Oulu29.09.2015
Software Architecture Decision-Making Practices and Challenges: An Industrial Case Study
• Missing a (possibly) better solution• Revisiting design rationale• Integrating new members• Improper documentation• Issues with customer communication• Knowledge gap between the engineers• Finding necessary resources• Lack of proper tools
• Lightweight technique or tool to guide• Improved documentation• Efficient information sharing• Keeping track of design decisions and rationale• Making decision-making agiler
• Team level decision-making methods resembles existing decision-making techniques.– Using a pre-defined criteria : Quality-Drive Decision Support
Method– By analyzing pros and cons: The Cost Benefit Analysis Method– Selecting the first satisfactory choice : Recognition Primed
Decision Model
• Majority of the identified challenges can be addressed by following activities that improve architecture knowledge management
[1] M. Svahnberg, C. Wohlin, L. Lundberg, and M. Mattsson, "A quality- driven decision-support method for identifying software architecture candidates," International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 547–573, 2003[2] R. Kazman, J. Asundi, and M. Klein, "Quantifying the costs and benefits of architectural decisions," in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering, 2001, pp. 297–306. [3] G. Klein and D. Klinger, "Naturalistic decision making," Gateway, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 16–19, 1991.
Conclusions• Team decision-making – informal but structured• Individual decision-making – heavily based on
personal characteristics• Several challenges are recognized Regardless, practitioners satisfied• Knowledge Management is recognized as a key improvement area