No abstract

A widely held understanding of coordination in software development is that it focuses on coordinating development activities to achieve a common goal. Our study, a case study in an international ICT company, suggests that in multi-site environment, it is not enough to coordinate development activities to achieve a common goal. Rather, more emphasis should be put on coordinating interdependencies between activities. Shifting the interest from activities (and subsystems) toward system-level dependencies requires software architects and developers to have a common understanding of the software architecture. Our findings reflect coordination challenges in multi-site environment with geographically dispersed teams. On the basis of the findings, we claim that architecture could be used to coordinate distributed development. However, this requires that the chief architect is capable of maintaining the integrity of the architecture and of communicating it. Furthermore, we list some requirements for a development methodology that uses architecture to support the coordination.

Existing CASE tools are often rigid and do not support the users' native methodologies. To alleviate this, more flexible and customisable tools called CASE shells are emerging. However, the customisation of those tools is still cumbersome and error-prone, and demands several configuration files that follow a rigid syntax of some metamodelling language(s). In order to make the eustomisation easier, we propose a graphical metamodelling editor, MetaEdit, with which the conceptual structures of the user methodology can be modelled easily using an easy-to-grasp graphical notation. With MetaEdit, methodology models can be ¢onsmacted with less effort and the configuration files for the CASE sheU can be created (semi)automatically. The tool is flexible i.e. its symbols and metamodel are user-definable. In consequence it can be used as a simple CASE shell. MetaEdit is based on the Object-Property-Role-Relationship (OPRR) data model. The paper presents the principles on which the editor is built, describes its operation, and discusses its relations to other research on metamodelling.

This chapter explores how two organizations have changed their software development practices by introducing Open Source technology. Our aim is to understand the institutional changes that are needed in and emerge from this process. This chapter develops a conceptualization building on the insights of entrepreneurial institutionalism, concentrating on the changing relationships of organizational groups in the areas of decision-making, rewarding and communication. We identify the links between the 1) emerging, yet embedded technology and 2) the underlying institutional decision-making, reward and communication structures. We move the Open Source 2.0 research agenda forward by concentrating empirical work on the nuances of institutional change that open source brings about in large hierarchical organisations. We will discuss the appropriateness of internal accounting organized according to the principle of an open market vs. a local library. We believe that both of these metaphors can support innovation, but different groups will find different approaches more appealing.

No abstract

CASE technology for improving information systems development (ISD) is mostly based on the creation and verification of IS models using a fixed set of techniques. However, ISD is a complex activity, which requires well selected and suited methodologies and development practices for different situations. This calls for CASE shells (metaCASE environments) in which the methodologies can be tailored. Further, the quality of produced deliverables (e.g. specifications and models) is dependent on the development process. The focus of this paper is on integrating a flexible process support into a CASE shell. The ISD process is specified using a graphical process model, the purposes of which are the guidance and coordination of various activities, and the management of the IS deliverables produced during the development. In this paper process modeling requirements are discussed, and the methodology engineering --especially the process modeling --process using a CASE shell is described.

Contemporary information systems (IS) products and services must fulfill the needs of consumers that are more widely scattered than traditional organizational end-users. New ways to incorporate these wide-audience end-users in the IS development are required. The lead-user method used in new product development is a promising approach to tackle this problem. However, the finding and recruiting of the lead-users has been found very burdensome for the firms. We propose lead-users to be found and recruited from virtual communities. This paper provides a conceptual framework that makes use of the Internet's possibilities – not only in recruiting the lead-users – but also when collaborating with them utilizing distributed Group Support Systems. Finally, we report on our preliminary field tests regarding the recruitment phase, discuss the implications of our work and provide suggestions for further research. [Service Science, ISSN 2164-3962 (print), ISSN 2164-3970 (online), was published by Services Science Global (SSG) from 2009 to 2011 as issues under ISBN 978-1-4276-2090-3.]

This study concerns the support of information system analysis and design process in a metaCASE environment. We see a process as highly evolutionary and unstructural in nature, thus requiring the tailorability of user process models and their conceptual basis, process modelling language (PML). In addition to the flexibility needed for guiding various system developers, the CASE environment needs to be enacted using strictly defined environment actions. A distinction between user and environment processes is made, hence distinguishing also their conceptual basis and modelling requirements. The study depicts the realisation of the basic concepts and tools required in modelling a PML and the integration of user and environment process models in a inetaCASE environment called MetaEdit+. The concepts and tools introduced aid in providing full customisability for a project to adapt its own PML for designing enactable process models. Finally, we briefly assess the benefits and weaknesses of our approach, and present our ongoing and future work related to this paper.