An industrial case study of implementing software risk management

Freimut, Bernd; Hartkopf, Susanne; Kaiser, Peter K.; Kontio, Jyrki; Kobitzsch, Werner

doi:10.1145/503271.503247

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Goals and risks identification of the GSRM focus on the preliminary analysis of the system-as-is, such as project information, project domain analysis and requirement artefacts. The taxonomy based questionnaires and brainstorming sessions with stakeholders are very effective techniques for the risk identification [16,47]. Therefore the techniques used and input artefacts required for the goal, requirement, and risk identification are similar.…”

Section: Process Oriented Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study on the implementation and evaluation of a goal-driven software development risk management model

Islam

Mouratidis

Weippl

2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Building a quality software product in the shortest possible time to satisfy the global market demand gives an enterprise a competitive advantage. However, uncertainties and risks exist at every stage of a software development project. These can have an extremely high influence on the success of the final software product. Early risk management practice is effective to manage such risks and contributes effectively towards the project success. Objective:Despite risk management approaches, a detailed guideline that explains where to integrate risk management activities into the project is still missing. Little effort has been directed towards the evaluation of the overall impact of a risk management method. We present a Goal-driven Software Development Risk Management Model (GSRM) and its explicit integration into the requirements engineering phase and an empirical investigation result of applying GSRM into a project. Method:We combined case study method with action research. This allows to guide the development team for managing risks and to attain goals as well as to identify ways to improve the proposed methodology. The data is from multiple sources and analysed both qualitative and quantitative way. Results: When risk factors are beyond the control of the project manager and project environment then it is difficult to control these risks. Project scope affects all dimensions of risk. GSRM is a reasonable risk management method that can be employed in an industrial context. The study results compare with other existing study results, to generalize findings and to identify contextual factors. Conclusion: A formal early stage risk management practice provides early warning related to the problems that exists in the project and contributes to the overall project success. It is not necessary to always consider budget and schedule constraints top priority. There exist issues such as requirements, change management, and user satisfaction influence these constraints.

show abstract

Section: Process Oriented Viewmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study on the implementation and evaluation of a goal-driven software development risk management model

Islam

Mouratidis

Weippl

2014

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As stated earlier in the methodology, it is considered very necessary to present a view of the generic Riskit method (here identified as the circular RAG) as seen in [10] and that of [6].…”

Section: The View Of the Riskit Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where RAG process is used the different risks within the whole project is broken down into four major components namely: "factors, events, outcome of an event, reactions, and effects on the overall goal of the developmental process" [7] & [6].…”

Section: Merits Of Ragmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Again , the authors were able to identify (through this work) that unforeseen problems account for the majority of challenges in software project and subsequently results in bad product quality and missing functionality amongst others. Perhaps this particular work is the closest literature to the proposed conceptual focus and main design in that it not only try to revise the authors's initial and pioneering design of 1996 presented in both [10] and reviewed in [6] it also provided a great attempt to improve RAG technique and consequently quality.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Enhanced Risk Analysis Model (ERAM) of Riskit

Ajayi¹,

Adekunle²,

Akinsanya³

et al. 2018

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An exploration of riskit analysis graph (RAG) as a major technique of Riskit method is presented in this work with the aim of enhancing its capability for better risk identification (and management) and subsequently, contribute to software delivery time. The study begin with a brief background of the riskit as a major tool in risk analysis; pointing to the need for an enhancement of the tool and associated benefits plus disadvantages. After this, a review of closely related works in the field of study is presented leading to identification of some perceived limitations and challenges in the generic Riskit methods (RAG inclusive). Next, an analysis of a typical riskit analysis graph process visà-vis its main components is presented. Using the stepwise approach to risk profiling, a prototype of the intended model called the "enhanced risk analysis model-ERAM"is presented based on risk ontology and prognosis states. The ERAM was developed in phases through leaning on the basic approach of risk models which comprises of a generic four steps-establishing the likelihood of occurrence of risks in the task pool, identification of major variables for measuring the impact (should it occur); a computer simulation is performed leading to a well defined risk profile and finally, a conclusion was drawn on the fact that Riskit can actually be extended through a deep analysis of it process components.

show abstract

“…In stark contrast, a negative perception of RM among managers and employees can hinder its adoption. Managers stated that "nobody gets credit for solving problems that did not happen" [15] whereas employees perceived RM as yet another new method in their work routine [16]. Therefore positive perceptions of RM result in the adoption of RM, whereas negative perceptions hinder its application.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Risk Management Adoption in Organisations and Supply Chains

Hudin

Hamid

Thoo

2015

AMM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of risk management (RM) increases the value of firms, reduces the cost of debts, increases profits and improves decision making. However, the debates on what determines RM adoption are still unresolved due to limited evidence of RM adoption in industrial settings. Therefore, this paper aims to propose a conceptual framework of the determinants that influence the adoption of RM. It has been found that two factors, the perception of risk management and risk perception, have often been neglected in prior research. Thus, this paper extends the existing literature by introducing these factors to the framework of RM adoption. It is suggested that future case studies can be conducted to examine the significance of these two factors.

show abstract

An industrial case study of implementing software risk management

Cited by 11 publications

References 9 publications

An empirical study on the implementation and evaluation of a goal-driven software development risk management model

An empirical study on the implementation and evaluation of a goal-driven software development risk management model

An Enhanced Risk Analysis Model (ERAM) of Riskit

Determinants of Risk Management Adoption in Organisations and Supply Chains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About