Personal software process (PSP) assistant

Sison, Raymund

doi:10.1109/apsec.2005.87

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research result from [12] shows that automating PSP data entry does not result in substantial amount of PSP tool adoption. The main reason for the low adoption of PSP tools (despite the automation of the data entry currently available) is related to the fact that users of tools such as PSP Dashboard, LEAP system and PSP Studio have to switch often between the recording tool and their development tool.…”

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Currently, there are tools that enable software engineers to collect data necessary to perform PSP quality assessment but recent research shows that software engineers are not using these tools, and the main reason they cite for not using PSP tools is that data collection process is too cumbersome [10]. To solve this problem, researchers have created PSP tools that automate the data collection process, but so far there is no research paper we could find that shows software engineers in industry are using the new set of PSP automating tools such Hackystat [11] and PSPA (Personal Software Process Assistant) [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the research result of [12], [13], and [17] one can conclude that the adoption barrier to PSP tools is related to the following issues:…”

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To address this problem, in an effort to solve the manual entry issue that prevents the adoption of PSP by software engineers, the software engineering researchers and practitioners have created tools such as Hackystat [11], PSPA [12], LEAP System [14] PSP Studio [15], and Dashboard [16].…”

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

DuoTracker: Tool Support for Software Defect Data Collection and Analysis

Akjnwale

Dascalu

Karam

2006

2006 International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA'06)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In today software industry defect tracking tools either help to improve an organization's software development process or an individual's software development process. No defect tracking tool currently exists that help both processes. In this paper we present DuoTracker, a tool that makes possible to track and analyze software defects for organizational and individual software process decision making. To accomplish this, DuoTracker has capabilities to classify defects in a manner that makes analysis at both organizational and individual software processes meaningful. The benefit of this approach is that software engineers are able to see how their personal software process improvement impacts their organization and vice versa. This paper shows why software engineers need to keep track of their program defects, how this is currently done, and how DuoTracker offers a new way of keeping track of software errors. Furthermore, DuoTracker is compared to other tracking tools that enable software developers to record program defects that occur during their individual software processes.

show abstract

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the research result of [12], [13], and [17] one can conclude that the adoption barrier to PSP tools is related to the following issues:…”

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

DuoTracker: Tool Support for Software Defect Data Collection and Analysis

Akjnwale

Dascalu

Karam

2006

2006 International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA'06)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several PSP support tools have been developed such as Process Dashboard [11], Hackystat [2,9], and PSPA [10] to help automatic data collection and analyses. Among those tools, Hackystat provides the most similar functionalities to the Jasmine in that both tools provide sensor-based automated data collection.…”

Section: Comparative Analysis Of Related Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jasmine: A PSP Supporting Tool

Shin¹,

Choi²,

Baik³

Software Process Dynamics and Agility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The PSP (Personal Software Process) was developed to help developers make high-quality products through improving their personal software development processes. With consistent measurement and analysis activities that the PSP suggests, developers can identify process deficiencies and make a reliable estimate on effort and quality. However, due to the high-overhead and context-switching problem of manual data recording, developers have difficulties to collect reliable data, which can lead to wrong analysis results. Also, it is very inconvenient to use the paper-based process guide of the PSP in navigating its process information and difficult to attach additional process-related information to the process guide. In this paper, we describe a PSP supporting tool that we have developed to deal with these problems. The tool provides automated data collection and analysis to help acquire reliable data and identify process deficiencies. It also provides an EPG (Electronic Process Guide) in order to provide easy access and navigation of the PSP process information, which is integrated with an ER (Experience Repository) to allow developers to store development experiences.

show abstract

The connections between group maturity, software development velocity, and planning effectiveness

Al-Sabbagh

Gren

2017

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical evidence regarding the connection between group development (maturity) and the success of software development teams is lacking. The purpose of this research is to gain a qualitative and quantitative understanding of how velocity and planning effectiveness of software teams connect to a group development model. The Group Development Questionnaire was given to 19 software developers from 4 work groups to assess their group development maturity. The work groups' responses to the survey were checked for correlation with development velocity and planning effectiveness. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 16 individuals from the same 4 work groups to explore issues about their group maturity and to validate the responses of the interviewees in the Group Development Questionnaire. The measurement of the fourth stage of group development had a strong association with the planning effectiveness measurement, which means that a team with less issues in the fourth phase of group development is more effective in adhering to its plans. On the other hand, group development and velocity showed no significant convergent validity. We conclude that the dynamics within software development teams might correlate to their ability to deliver the expected outcome as planned but not to their ability to develop tasks faster. KEYWORDSgroup maturity, software engineering, velocity, planning effectiveness, performance INTRODUCTIONGroups, like humans, move through successive phases; they tend to advance and regress. 1 A group is sometimes defined as 3 or more members that interact with each other to perform a number of tasks and achieve a set of common goals. 2 A team, on the other hand, has developed both the goals and the means to achieve these tasks effectively. 3 The emphasis on the importance of arranging work in a group form emerged, in part, from the growing awareness of the role of groups in facilitating or blocking individual and organizational effectiveness, and more work can be achieved in well-functioning teams than dividing work to individuals only. 4 As a result, organizations are counting on teams as the main asset for accomplishing goals. 5 Group development can be defined as the process in which a group navigates a number of stages until it becomes a mature team. Consequently, the term "group maturity" refers to the level of development a group has acquired over the course of its lifespan. Wheelan et al 3 reported that 83%of teams that were assessed in a study were found to be work groups without effective means to reach their common goals. A team, therefore, is here defined as one that has successfully navigated the earlier stages of group development and has emerged as a mature, high performing unit capable of achieving common goals. 6 The work of Susan Wheelan on group development research helped determine the common threads among group development models and postulate the basis for the Integrated Model of Group Development (IMGD). In this model, a group is believed to go through 5 successive ...

show abstract

Personal software process (PSP) assistant

Cited by 18 publications

References 8 publications

DuoTracker: Tool Support for Software Defect Data Collection and Analysis

DuoTracker: Tool Support for Software Defect Data Collection and Analysis

Jasmine: A PSP Supporting Tool

The connections between group maturity, software development velocity, and planning effectiveness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About