\section{Research Design}
\label{sec:researchdesign}

% TODO: Tenho a impressão de que esse parágrafo cairia bem no último parágrafo
% da introdução. Pelo menos a ideia dele uma vez que resume bem o trabalho
In this paper, we studied practical alternatives to harmonize different
software development processes. We are interested in the relationship between
government and academia from the project management perspective, without the
enforcement of changing the internal processes. We present two research
question that guided our work:

\textbf{RQ1.}\textit{How to introduce open source and agile best practices into
government-academia collaboration project?}

\textbf{RQ2.}\textit{What practices would favor effective team management in
government-academia collaborative project?}

To answer these questions, we use as a case study research method. We selected
as a case the evolution of the Brazilian Public Software portal (SPB)
\cite{meirelles2017spb}, a government-academia collaborative project based on
open source software. To validate our answers, we picked three different points
of views: developers, government agent, and data collected from the project
repository.

\subsection{The case study}

%TODO:
%Apresentar melhor a SPB plataforma aqui para preparar a discussão dos resultados (usar modelo IEEE Software)

%TODO por parágrafo
%five existing open source software (substitutir software por systems) --> As minhas modificações removeram isso, contudo vale a pena verificar
%systems-of-sytems software (Colab) (substitutir software por framework) --> Não alterei uma vez que me parece inconsistente com os trabalhos antigos.

The project to evolve the SPB was a partnership between government and academia
held between 2014 and 2016 \cite{meirelles2017spb}. The old version of SPB
suffers from maintenance problems and design-reality gaps. In this sense,
Ministry of Planning (MPOG) decided to join the University of Brasília (UnB)
and the University of São Paulo (USP) to develop a new platform based existing
open source software.  However, it was required to integrate multiple software
in the same system in the way that end user has a unified experience between
the tools.

The new SPB portal was a novelty in the context of the Brazilian government,
due to the technologies employed and its diverse features. The project includes
social networking (Noosfero), mailing lists (MailMan), version control system
(GitLab), and source code quality monitoring (Mezuro).  All of this software is
integrated using a system-of-systems software (Colab) [1].

%Colocar no discurso direto: The project hired 6 IT profectionals, and 2 designers. -> Eu acho importante falar que eles tinham backgroun em FLOSS
The academic team carried out development activities in the Advanced Laboratory
of Production, Research and Innovation in Software Engineering (LAPPIS) at UnB.
The laboratory born from members of Brazillian FLOSS community and from
professors that worked with agile values, naturally, LAPPIS embrace the best
practices of both ecosystems. For this project, the laboratory had a total of
42 undergraduate interns, and two professors engaged in the development team.
Finally, the project had 6 senior professionals with vast experience with
FLOSS, and two designers specialized in User eXperience (UX).

The government team was composed of one director, one coordinator, and two IT
analysts from MPOG. They were responsible for contracts and managed the
collaboration, which means they do not produce software. Analysts following
traditional management approaches (e.g., RUP, CMMI, and PMBOK) for a new
contract and homologating software services.

The leaders of LAPPIS and MPOG periodically met in person to manage the project
progress, discussing strategic issues and technical goals. Initially, these
meetings took place at the Ministry's headquarters and, usually, only directors
and professors participated. On the academic side, the management of the
development teams often spends two weeks per sprint and release a new version
each 4-month. During the project progress, this workflow proved to be
inefficient. Conflicts between the internal management processes and
differences in pace and goals of each institution were compromising the
platform development.

% TODO: Eu alterei de acordo com os comentário. Contudo, da minha experiência no projeto eu não sei se isso é verdade. Eu acho que não foi bonito como descrito aqui.
We decided to adopt and assess a set of empirical practices based on FLOSS
ecosystems and agile values. We tried this strategy as an attempt to improve
the project management process by reducing the conflict between the government
and academia. We built an experimental management model to harmonize the
different cultures. During the project, the members were encouraged to try
FLOSS practices in intuitive a non-systematic way. In this paper, we try to
analyze and codify these practices.

\subsection{Survey, Interview and Data Collection}

%UnB undergraduate interns
%Online questionnaire (Não usar survey, usar sempre questionnaire)
%We also interviewed 
%The questions are classified into categories
%tirar "in the context of government and project;"

We divided the development team into two groups of participants according to
their roles during the project: UnB undergraduate interns and Senior
developers. For each set of members, we designed an online questionnaire with
topics related to project organization, development process, communication and
relationship between members, acquired knowledge, and experience with open
source projects. We also interviewed two MPOG analysts who directly interacted
with the development team and project development process. The interview
questions had four parts: (1) Professional profile; (2) Organization,
communication and development methodologies in the context of government; (3)
Satisfaction with the developed platform; (3) Lessons learned.


%falar as porcentagens sobre a profissão de todos inclusive teacher and public servants
%link to online questionnaire throught e-mail
We sent the online questionnaire link via email to 42 interns, all of them
worked at any period of the project as a developer and received a scholarship.
We received a total of 37 responses. Their average age in September 2017 is 25
years old, and 92\% of them are male. Currently, 35\% continue at the university
as undergraduate or graduate students, 19\% work as a developer in a small
company and 19\% in medium or large enterprises, 11\% are entrepreneurs, 8% are
unemployed, and the others work as teachers or civil servants. About of the
interns 43\% said the SPB project was their first experience with open source
software.

%We also invited the 8 seniors developers to filling the oline questionnaire and all of them did.
%They average age are

We also sent the online questionnaire through emails to 8 senior developers (IT
professionals), and all of them participated.  Their average age is 32 years
old, and 87\% are male. On average they have 11 years of experience in the IT
market. Currently, 62\% of the interviewed have a formal job, 37\% are freelance
developers, 25\% are master's degree students, and 25\% are entrepreneurs. On
average they worked in 5 different companies and participated in 4 to 80
projects. They joined in this collaborative project between 7 to 24 months, and
86\% of them had some experience with FLOSS before the SPB project.

We interviewed two MPOG analysts separately.  Each interview took an average of
2 hours with 28 open questions. They are over 30 years old, and they have more
than 7 years of experience working in the government. Only one of them
continues working in the same ministry. Both of the analysts said this
collaborative project was their first experience of government-academia
development collaboration.
 
%We collected from the repository manager all open issues and commits.
%We collected from the main project repository all the issues and commits.
%The number of comment authors
%In the main project repository
Finally, we quantitatively analyze data about the development of the project,
publicly available on the SPB platform. We collected data from the repository
manager all open issues and commits. We not considered the development
repositories of the integrated software (e.g., Noosfero and Gitlab).  Regarding
the issues, we collected the total of them, project name, authors, opening
date, title, and the number of comments.  We also get information about the
total commits, different authors per issues, the number of comments, authors of
comments, the number of authors other than comments.  During the period from
April 2015 to June 2016, 879 issues were opened by 59 distinct authors with a
total of 4,658 comments and 64 different commentators. The development team
made 3,256 commits in the repository provided by SPB platform.
