Siemens Global Studio Project: Experiences Adopting an Integrated GSD Infrastructure

Mullick, Neel; Bass, M.; Houda, Zakaria El; Paulish, Paulish; Cataldo, Marcelo

doi:10.1109/icgse.2006.261234

Cited by 48 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Architectures that require multiple sites to implement a change increase the time required to complete the change [31]. An unstable architecture that changes while development work is ongoing can cause confusion among distributed teams as to what their responsibilities are [48]; changing architecture can also cause integration tests to become out-of-sync with the emerging product, resulting in spurious test failures [48].…”

Section: Product Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lack of implicit knowledge resulting from limited informal communication means processes like change management, if not explicitly and thoroughly defined, can be applied differently at different sites [3,48]. Distributed development also introduces the possibility of different (and incompatible) processes at various sites [3].…”

Section: Fear and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Distributed development also introduces the possibility of different (and incompatible) processes at various sites [3]. Lack of informal communication also limits process visibility, leading to misunderstandings and frustration on the part of remote teams [5,48].…”

Section: Fear and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Global software development and collaboration

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While organisations recognise the advantages offered by global software development, there are many socio-technical barriers that affect successful collaboration in this inter-cultural environment. In this paper we present a review of the global software development literature where we highlight collaboration problems experienced by a cross-section of organisations in twenty-six studies. We also look at the literature to answer how organisations are over-coming these barriers in practice. We build on our previous study on global software development where we define collaboration as four practices related to agreeing, allocating, and planning goals, objectives, and tasks among distributed teams.We found that the key barriers to collaboration are geographic, temporal, cultural, and linguistic distance; the primary solutions to overcoming these barriers include site visits, synchronous communication technology, and knowledge sharing infrastructure to capture implicit knowledge and make it explicit.

show abstract

Section: Product Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fear and Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global software development and collaboration

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It appears that there is a strong preference to coordinate work across onshore and offshore locations between employees of the same firm (the vendor) rather than between onshore client and offshore vendor employees. Coordinating geographically distributed work is a widely recognized challenge in this industry , Mullick et al 2006). This suggests some surface validity for our conjecture that the advantages of withinfirm coordination may be more salient for spatially distributed work rather than colocated work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring

Srikanth

Puranam

2014

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T o examine what, if any, are the differences in how activities are coordinated within versus between firms, we conducted interviews with 32 project managers regarding 60 projects in the offshore software services industry. Uniquely, our projects were sampled along two dimensions: (1) colocation versus spatial distribution and (2) delivery by groups of individuals from a single firm versus from multiple firms. Our evidence suggests that in colocated projects, the same broad categories of coordination mechanisms are used both within and between firms. However, there is a qualitative difference in how geographically (i.e., spatially) distributed projects are coordinated within versus between firms. Distributed projects conducted within firms rely extensively on tacit coordination mechanisms; such mechanisms are not readily available in between-firm projects that are spatially distributed. This difference may arise because of the lack of shared history and lack of enforcement through common authority in the between-firm context.

show abstract

“…An example of such mechanism could be a process engine that manages expertise of the different participating organizations with regard to the generation of artifacts during the development process. Still, the formal specification of tests can minimize the problems of ambiguity and also reduces the needs for communication (MULLICK et al, 2006), (AVRITZER et al, 2007) and (AVRITZER et al, 2008)). …”

Section: Processmentioning

confidence: 99%