Merge branch 'oss_2018' of softwarepublico.gov.br:softwarepublico/articles into oss_2018

Conflicts: oss2018/content/03-methods.tex oss2018/spb-oss-2018.bib

Merge branch 'oss_2018' of softwarepublico.gov.br:softwarepublico/articles into oss_2018
Conflicts: oss2018/content/03-methods.tex oss2018/spb-oss-2018.bib
Paulo Meireles
2 parents 029a4258 7b530d0d
Showing 4 changed files with 110 additions and 105 deletions Show diff stats
oss2018/content/01-introduction.tex
oss2018/content/02-relatedwork.tex
oss2018/spb-oss-2018.bib
oss2018/spb-oss-2018.tex
@@ -3,32 +3,38 @@
 E-government projects differ from others due to their complexity and extension
 \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. They are complex because they combine
 construction, innovation, information \& 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 can be considered an
-alternative to create novelty for e-government projects and to meet the needs of
-society.  This collaborative work has challenges, such as organizing the
-collaboration project, aligning goals, synchronizing the pace of between
+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
+as an alternative to create novelty for e-government projects and to meet the
+needs of society. This collaborative work has challenges, such as organizing
+the collaboration project, aligning goals, synchronizing the pace of between
 government and academia \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}, and overcoming the
 failure trend of e-government projects \cite{goldfinch2007pessimism}.
-Poor project management is one of the main reasons why e-government projects
-fail \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. When government and academia combine
-efforts to develop an e-government solution, the differences in the project
-management become an issue. Academia commonly work on cutting edge of
-technology while government is still relying on traditional techniques.
-Changing the development process in large-size institutions represents
-an organizational disturbance which impacts on structure, culture, and
-management practices \cite{nerur2015challenges}. As a result, government and
-academia have to harmonize their view to increasing the chances of success in
-projects with tight deadlines and short budgets.
+Poor project management is one of the causes of e-government projects failure
+\cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment} which in turn grows into a critical issue
+when government and academia combine efforts to develop an e-gov solution. 
+Academia commonly works on cutting edge of technology while the government is
+still relying on traditional techniques.  Changing the development process in
+large-size institutions represents an organizational disturbance with impacts
+on structure, culture, and management practices \cite{nerur2015challenges}. As
+a result, government and academia have to harmonize their view to increasing
+the chances of success in projects with tight deadlines and short budgets.
-% TODO: Projetos de sl tem x características e muitas de suas práticas tem se mostrado válidas e que  abrem precedentes para utilizar no contexto governo academia. Falar da influência do SL no projeto
+Due to the plurality of the Free Libre Open Source (FLOSS) ecosystems and the
+diversity of organizations which currently employ agile methodologies,
+procedures from both may be an option for harmonizing different management
+approaches. Open communication, project modularity, the community of users, and
+fast response to problems are just a few of the FLOSS ecosystem practices
+\cite{capiluppi, warsta}.  Individuals and interactions, working software,
+customer collaboration, responding to change \cite{beck} are the core of agile
+development. With this in mind, FLOSS and agile practices may improve the process
+management and the cooperation of distinct teams.
-In this work we investigate a set of practices from a 30-month
+In this work, we investigate the empirical method built during 30 months of a
 government-academia project that helped to harmonize the differences between
-government and academia management cultures. We trace the best practices based
-on open source ecosystems and agile methodologies. Finally, we validate their
-benefits by collecting data from the main project repository and by surveying
-the project participant points of view.
-
+both organization management cultures. We trace the best practices based on
+FLOSS ecosystems and agile methodology. Finally, we collect data from the
+project repository and survey the project participant points of view to
+extracting a set of methods which favor government-academia collaboration.
 \section{Related work}
 \label{sec:relatedwork}
-% TODO:
-%O related work está bem montado. Contudo, eu senti falta de falar sobre
-%software livre. A adoção dele ou de suas práticas. Se não existe ainda esse
-%estudo, então essa seria uma bela colaboração da nossa parte e deveria ser
-%evidênciada no último parágrafo. IMO isso é importante uma vez que é a nossa
-%chance de por a parte de FLOSS que sempre defendemos, em adição a conferência é
-%sobre FLOSS e talvez possam dizer que a gente não se 'enquadra' na conferência.
-%Não acho que precisamos tirar a parte 'agile', mas precisamos ser mais conciso
-%sobre isso
-
-%Sugestão do Fabio: Colocar referências de trabalho que conseguiram conciliar
-%ou que reportam dificuldade em conciliar ou aplicar processos de gerenciamento
-%em um projeto de colaboração
-
+% TODO: Verificar se não vale a pena citar os fatores que o Strode descobriu.
+% Eu acho que deixaria a frase mais completa
 Discussions on how to introduce new management methods into an organization are
-present in several papers.  Nerur et al. identify the critical issues that involve
-migrating from traditional to agile by comparing main practices of the two
+present in several papers.  Nerur et al. recognized critical issues concerning
+the migration from traditional to agile by comparing practices of both
 methodologies \cite{nerur2015challenges}. The authors point out managerial,
 organizational, people, process, and technological issues to be rethought and
 reconfigured in an organization for a successful migration. Strode et al.
-investigate the correlation between adoption of agile methodologies and
-organizational culture \cite{impactOfOrganizationalCulture}. They evaluate the
-perception of organizational culture and the use of agile practices in nine
-software development projects, identifying organizational culture factors that
-are correlated to the implementation of agile methods.
+investigated the relationship between the adoption of agile methodologies and
+organizational culture \cite{impactOfOrganizationalCulture} by evaluating nine
+projects. They identified a set of factors directly linked to the agile
+methods.
 Some works also discuss how academia can collaborate with the industry in the
-management of software projects. Chookittikul et al. evaluates the increasing
-use of the agile methods by software development organizations in Thailand and
-suggests universities create curricula which develop in their undergraduate
-students' practical skills required by industry (mainly agile practices) to
-encourage the software industry growth in the region \cite{cho2011gap}.
-Sandberg et al. report the use of Scrum in a collaborative research
-consortium between industry and academia (involving ten industry partners and
-five universities in Sweden) \cite{sandberg2017iacollaboration}.
-
-New variables arise when a different approach to project management is
-introduced to complex and large-scale organizations, such as the public
-administration.  Alleman et al. describe a production deployment for the US
-government, focus on describing the methodology applied to address long-term
-planning and value estimation \cite{alleman2003making}.  Agile methods
-application in the Brazilian public sector are approached by Melo et al. \cite{melo2013agileBr} and De
-Sousa et al.  \cite{de2016using}, both are experiences limited
-to pilot projects. Not production-ready one that will provide more accurate
-data with the real world.  
-
-This paper differentiates itself from others by describing a production level
-software development collaboration between government and academia,
-analyzing differences in the development process and administrative issues of
-the two organizations, and evidencing empirical practices that harmonized the
-interactions and satisfied the development and management process of both
-sides.
-
-% TODO: if needed, we can add this paper as related work
-%% Staying Agile in Government Software Projects - reports how the agile culture and practices (XP and Scrum) were introduced in a development team working on a government project. Describes practices added, adapted and abandoned. They had a experienced small team that did not know agile. TODO: Not sure if any process had to be added/adapted/abandoned at the government side.
-
-%Talvez seria relevante citar Extending Patterns for Fearless Change: sobre como introduzir novas ideias em uma organização tradicional (em particular, como introduzir métodos ágeis) 
-%O Mestrado do Alexandre Freire sobre como ensinar métodos ágeis que tem toda um capítulo sobre governo: https://www.ime.usp.br/~ale/dissertacao_ale_para_web.pdf
+management of software projects. Chookittikul et al. evaluated the increasing
+use of the agile techniques in the software development companies in Thailand.
+The authors suggested that universities should create curricula which develop
+in their undergraduate student's practical skills required by industry (mainly
+agile practices) to promote growth in the local software business \cite{cho2011gap}.
+Sandberg et al. report the use of Scrum in a collaborative research consortium
+between industry and academia (involving ten industry partners and five
+universities in Sweden) \cite{sandberg2017iacollaboration}.
+
+Complex and large-scale organizations, such as the public administration, have
+to deal with multiple project variables. Alleman et al. describe a production
+deployment for the US government, focus on the methodology applied to address
+long-term planning and value estimation \cite{alleman2003making}.  Agile
+methods application in the Brazilian public sector are approached by Melo et
+al. \cite{melo2013agileBr} and De Sousa et al. \cite{de2016using}, both are
+experiences limited to pilot projects.
+
+Several works tried to highlight the FLOSS practices, while others attempted to
+determine the relationship between the FLOSS practices and agile methods.
+Capiluppi et al. examined about 400 projects to find FLOSS project properties
+\cite{capiluppi}. In their work, they extracted generic characterization
+(project size, age, license, and programming language), analyzed the average
+number of people involved in the project, the community of user, and
+documentation characteristics. Warsta et al. found differences and similarities
+between agile development and FLOSS practices \cite{warsta}. The authors argued
+that FLOSS development may differ from agile by philosophical and economic
+perspective, on the other hand, both shares the definition of work. Finally,
+Eric Raymond describes many of his experience and decisions in his work with
+FLOSS communities \cite{raymond}, this report has many intersections with the
+agile manifesto.
+
+This paper distinguishes itself from others by studying a a production level
+software development collaboration between government and academia. We extracted
+empirical practices that helped to harmonize the interactions between two
+different development process and satisfied the management process of both
+sides. We analyzed these methods from the FLOSS an agile perspective.
@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
   author={Anthopoulos, Leonidas and Reddick, Christopher G and Giannakidou, Irene and Mavridis, Nikolaos},
   journal={Government Information Quarterly},
   volume={33},
-  number={1},
   pages={161--173},
   year={2016},
   publisher={Elsevier}
@@ -15,25 +14,15 @@
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track},
  series = {ICSE-SEIP '17},
  year = {2017},
- isbn = {978-1-5386-2717-4},
  location = {Buenos Aires, Argentina},
  pages = {73--82},
- numpages = {10},
- url = {https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2017.20},
- doi = {10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2017.20},
- acmid = {3103122},
  publisher = {IEEE Press},
- address = {Piscataway, NJ, USA},
- keywords = {agile methodologies, case study, collaboration, industry-academia research}
 }
 @article{goldfinch2007pessimism,
-  ISSN={00333352, 15406210},
-  URL={http://www.jstor.org/stable/4624644},
   author={Shaun Goldfinch},
   journal={Public Administration Review},
-  number={5},
   pages={917-929},
   publisher={[American Society for Public Administration, Wiley]},
   title={Pessimism, Computer Failure, and Information Systems Development in the Public Sector},
@@ -46,7 +35,6 @@
   author={Highsmith, Jim and Cockburn, Alistair},
   journal={Computer},
   volume={34},
-  number={9},
   pages={120--127},
   year={2001},
   publisher={IEEE}
@@ -87,7 +75,6 @@
   author={Fowler, Martin},
   journal={Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences},
   volume={6},
-  number={1},
   pages={12--24},
   year={2001},
   publisher={Springer}
@@ -98,7 +85,6 @@
   author={Cockburn, Alistair and Highsmith, Jim},
   journal={Computer},
   volume={34},
-  number={11},
   pages={131--133},
   year={2001},
   publisher={IEEE}
@@ -116,19 +102,12 @@
  author = {Nerur, Sridhar and Mahapatra, RadhaKanta and Mangalaraj, George},
  title = {Challenges of Migrating to Agile Methodologies},
  journal = {Commun. ACM},
- issue_date = {May 2005},
  volume = {48},
  number = {5},
  month = may,
  year = {2005},
- issn = {0001-0782},
  pages = {72--78},
- numpages = {7},
- url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1060710.1060712},
- doi = {10.1145/1060710.1060712},
- acmid = {1060712},
  publisher = {ACM},
- address = {New York, NY, USA}
 } 
 @inproceedings{meirelles2017spb,
@@ -137,16 +116,9 @@
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Open Collaboration},
  series = {OpenSym '17},
  year = {2017},
- isbn = {978-1-4503-5187-4},
  location = {Galway, Ireland},
  pages = {16:1--16:10},
- articleno = {16},
- numpages = {10},
- url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3125433.3125471},
- doi = {10.1145/3125433.3125471},
- acmid = {3125471},
  publisher = {ACM},
- address = {New York, NY, USA},
  keywords = {Free Software, Management Team, Software Integration}
 }
@@ -164,7 +136,6 @@
   author={Dyb{\aa}, Tore and Dings{\o}yr, Torgeir},
   journal={Information and software technology},
   volume={50},
-  number={9},
   pages={833--859},
   year={2008},
   publisher={Elsevier}
@@ -224,6 +195,42 @@
  organization={IEEE}
 }
+@inproceedings{capiluppi,
+  title={Characteristics of open source projects},
+  author={Capiluppi, Andrea and Lago, Patricia and Morisio, Maurizio},
+  booktitle={Software Maintenance and Reengineering, 2003. Proceedings. Seventh European Conference on},
+  pages={317--327},
+  year={2003},
+  organization={IEEE}
+}
+
+@inproceedings{warsta,
+  title={Is open source software development essentially an agile method},
+  author={Warsta, Juhani and Abrahamsson, Pekka},
+  booktitle={Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering},
+  pages={143--147},
+  year={2003}
+}
+
+@article{beck,
+  title={Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Agile Alliance (2001)},
+  author={Beck, Kent and Beedle, M and Bennekum, A and others},
+  journal={Retrieved June},
+  volume={14},
+  year={2010}
+}
+
+@article{raymond,
+  title={The cathedral and the bazaar},
+  author={Raymond, Eric},
+  journal={Philosophy \& Technology},
+  volume={12},
+  number={3},
+  pages={23},
+  year={1999},
+  publisher={Springer}
+}
+
 @incollection{booch2003,
 title = "Collaborative Development Environments",
 series = "Advances in Computers",
@@ -236,4 +243,3 @@ doi = &quot;https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2458(03)59001-5&quot;,
 url = "http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065245803590015",
 author = "Grady Booch and Alan W. Brown"
 }
-
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
 \input{content/03-methods}
 \input{content/04-results}
 \input{content/05-discussion}
+\input{content/06-conclusion}
 \bibliographystyle{splncs03}
 \bibliography{spb-oss-2018}
	@@ -3,32 +3,38 @@		@@ -3,32 +3,38 @@
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 \& communications technologies, politics,	5	construction, innovation, information \& communications technologies, politics,
6	-and social impact. Their extension, on the other hand, is related to their scope,
7	-target audience, organizational size, time, and the corresponding resistance to
8	-change. Government-academia collaborative projects can be considered an
9	-alternative to create novelty for e-government projects and to meet the needs of
10	-society. This collaborative work has challenges, such as organizing the
11	-collaboration project, aligning goals, synchronizing the pace of between	6	+and social impact. Their extension, on the other hand, is related to their
		7	+scope, target audience, organizational size, time, and the corresponding
		8	+resistance to change. Government-academia collaborative projects may be treated
		9	+as an alternative to create novelty for e-government projects and to meet the
		10	+needs of society. This collaborative work has challenges, such as organizing
		11	+the collaboration project, aligning goals, synchronizing the pace of between
12	government and academia \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}, and overcoming the	12	government and academia \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}, and overcoming the
13	failure trend of e-government projects \cite{goldfinch2007pessimism}.	13	failure trend of e-government projects \cite{goldfinch2007pessimism}.
14		14
15	-Poor project management is one of the main reasons why e-government projects
16	-fail \cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment}. When government and academia combine
17	-efforts to develop an e-government solution, the differences in the project
18	-management become an issue. Academia commonly work on cutting edge of
19	-technology while government is still relying on traditional techniques.
20	-Changing the development process in large-size institutions represents
21	-an organizational disturbance which impacts on structure, culture, and
22	-management practices \cite{nerur2015challenges}. As a result, government and
23	-academia have to harmonize their view to increasing the chances of success in
24	-projects with tight deadlines and short budgets.	15	+Poor project management is one of the causes of e-government projects failure
		16	+\cite{anthopoulos2016egovernment} which in turn grows into a critical issue
		17	+when government and academia combine efforts to develop an e-gov solution.
		18	+Academia commonly works on cutting edge of technology while the government is
		19	+still relying on traditional techniques. Changing the development process in
		20	+large-size institutions represents an organizational disturbance with impacts
		21	+on structure, culture, and management practices \cite{nerur2015challenges}. As
		22	+a result, government and academia have to harmonize their view to increasing
		23	+the chances of success in projects with tight deadlines and short budgets.
25		24
26	-% TODO: Projetos de sl tem x características e muitas de suas práticas tem se mostrado válidas e que abrem precedentes para utilizar no contexto governo academia. Falar da influência do SL no projeto	25	+Due to the plurality of the Free Libre Open Source (FLOSS) ecosystems and the
		26	+diversity of organizations which currently employ agile methodologies,
		27	+procedures from both may be an option for harmonizing different management
		28	+approaches. Open communication, project modularity, the community of users, and
		29	+fast response to problems are just a few of the FLOSS ecosystem practices
		30	+\cite{capiluppi, warsta}. Individuals and interactions, working software,
		31	+customer collaboration, responding to change \cite{beck} are the core of agile
		32	+development. With this in mind, FLOSS and agile practices may improve the process
		33	+management and the cooperation of distinct teams.
27		34
28	-In this work we investigate a set of practices from a 30-month	35	+In this work, we investigate the empirical method built during 30 months of a
29	government-academia project that helped to harmonize the differences between	36	government-academia project that helped to harmonize the differences between
30	-government and academia management cultures. We trace the best practices based
31	-on open source ecosystems and agile methodologies. Finally, we validate their
32	-benefits by collecting data from the main project repository and by surveying
33	-the project participant points of view.
34	-	37	+both organization management cultures. We trace the best practices based on
		38	+FLOSS ecosystems and agile methodology. Finally, we collect data from the
		39	+project repository and survey the project participant points of view to
		40	+extracting a set of methods which favor government-academia collaboration.
	@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@		@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
40	\input{content/03-methods}	40	\input{content/03-methods}
41	\input{content/04-results}	41	\input{content/04-results}
42	\input{content/05-discussion}	42	\input{content/05-discussion}
		43	+\input{content/06-conclusion}
43		44
44	\bibliographystyle{splncs03}	45	\bibliographystyle{splncs03}
45	\bibliography{spb-oss-2018}	46	\bibliography{spb-oss-2018}