[oss-2018] applying additional revisions of Carla

Melissa Wen
1 parent 3d59c75e
Showing 3 changed files with 11 additions and 12 deletions Show diff stats
oss2018/content/01-introduction.tex
oss2018/content/04-results.tex
oss2018/content/05-discussion.tex
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 E-government projects differ from others due to their complexity and extension
 \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. They are complex because they combine
-construction, innovation, information , innovation, information \& communications technologies, politics, communications technologies, politics,
+development, innovation, information , innovation, information \& communications technologies, politics, communications technologies, politics,
 and social impact. Their extension, on the other hand, is related to their
 scope, target audience, organizational size, time, and the corresponding
 resistance to change. Government-academia collaborative projects may be treated
@@ -19,8 +19,7 @@ communication and management was built using the development leaders&#39;
 experiences in FLOSS and agile projects to meet the government bureaucracies.
 \textit{\textbf{Use of the system under development to develop the system itself}}.
-The first version of the new SPB portal was released nine months after the
-project beginning. Due to the platform features for software development and
+Due to the platform features for software development and
 social network, the development coordinators decided to use the platform under
 construction to develop the system itself. Gradually, in addition to development
 activities, government and academia migrated the project management and the
@@ -142,8 +141,8 @@ better technical decisions}, as quoted in one of the answers to the senior
 developer's questionnaire: \textit{``I think my main contribution was to
 balance the relations between the MPOG staff and the university team.''}. {63\%} of
 the senior developers believed they have collaborated to conciliate the management
-and development process between the two institutions and also {63\%} of them
-that they helped MPOG staff to express their requests more clearly. Government
+and development process between the two institutions and also {63\%} of them 
+helped MPOG staff express their requests more clearly. Government
 analysts were also more open to suggestions from these developers:
 \textit{``They are developers of the upstream projects of the systems that
 integrate the platform. They conveyed trust, and then we trust in the developed
@@ -161,7 +160,7 @@ the project for all of them. {75\%} of the senior developers believed that ``Wor
 in pairs with a senior'' and 63\% that ``Participate in joint review tasks''
 were the tasks with the involvement of them that most contributed to the
 evolution of university interns in the project. {75\%} believed that the knowledge
-shared by them to a intern was widespread among the others in the team.
+shared by them to one intern was widespread among the others in the team.
 Government analysts also pointed this knowledge sharing: \textit{``On
 the side of the universities, what we noticed was a significant improvement in the platform
 with the hiring of the original developers of the systems. They had a guide on
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ the use of the nine best practices.
 \begin{itemize}
 \setlength{\itemsep}{2pt} 
 \item Government staff, academic coordinators, senior developers and team coaches biweekly meet at the university lab, academia headquarters, for sprint planning and review.
-\item Conduct on the platform the technical discussions between government staff and the development team.
+\item Conducte on the platform technical discussions between government staff and the development team.
 \item Involve government board directors only in strategic planning of the project.
 \item Build a continuous delivery pipeline with stages involving both sides.
 \end{itemize} \end{flushleft} &
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ the use of the nine best practices.
 \setlength{\itemsep}{2pt} 
 \item Reducing communication misunderstanding;
 \item Better meeting expectations of both sides;
-\item Improvement of decision-making process;
+\item Improvement of the decision-making process;
 \item Overcoming the government bias regarding low productivity of collaborative projects with academia;
 \item Synchronizing the execution pace of activities;
 \item Sharing a common understanding of the process from one side to the other.
@@ -139,10 +139,10 @@ a few obvious limitations. Firstly, we point out the lack of communication recor
 low traceability of the management data referring to the first phase of the
 project. Secondly, we consider a drawback the hiatus between the completion of the
 project and the conduction of interviews and questionnaires, since we rely on
-the memory of the interviewees to rescue the events. Lastly, the new work
-experiences of the respondents after the project and their current working
-mindset may also modify their perceptions on the topics addressed in the
-questionnaire and consequently their responses.
+the memory of the interviewees to rescue the events. Lastly, the current
+situation of the respondents, such as their current working midset, may also
+alter their perception on the on the topics addressed in the questionnaire and
+consequently their responses.
 Finally, we collected a significant amount of data and testimonials related to
 the teaching of software engineering. We consider the project studied an
	@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@		@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
2		2
3	E-government projects differ from others due to their complexity and extension	3	E-government projects differ from others due to their complexity and extension
4	\cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. They are complex because they combine	4	\cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. They are complex because they combine
5	-construction, innovation, information , innovation, information \& communications technologies, politics, communications technologies, politics,	5	+development, innovation, information , innovation, information \& communications technologies, politics, communications technologies, politics,
6	and social impact. Their extension, on the other hand, is related to their	6	and social impact. Their extension, on the other hand, is related to their
7	scope, target audience, organizational size, time, and the corresponding	7	scope, target audience, organizational size, time, and the corresponding
8	resistance to change. Government-academia collaborative projects may be treated	8	resistance to change. Government-academia collaborative projects may be treated