PhD Defense Øyvind Hauge
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

PhD Defense Øyvind Hauge

on

  • 1,185 views

A brief presentation of my PhD used for the PhD defense. The topic of my PhD was Adoption of Open Source Software in Software-Intensive Industry.

A brief presentation of my PhD used for the PhD defense. The topic of my PhD was Adoption of Open Source Software in Software-Intensive Industry.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,185
Views on SlideShare
1,184
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Focused on two related topics:* OSS adoption in general* Selection of OSS componentsEmpirical, exploitative studies to understand how organizations adopt OSSOSS adoption in legal (for profit) entities/organizations -> software-intensive industry
  • Unclear what it meant: OSS and OSS adoption was a black box and there was significant uncertainty about what OSS really meant to software-intensive organizations.Alienated, OSS is something different from traditional software: Moreover, OSS was characterized by many other conflicts and contradictions like: free software vs OSS, the cathedral vs. the bazaar, and copyright vs. copyleft. Use of the term has been confusing: OSS, OSS adoption, and other terms were used quite loosely in the literature. Several studies, talk about OSS adoption without really describing what these organizations do.Resulted in skepticism towards it and false expectations among those who are not familiar with it
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jigsaw_red_10.svghttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jigsaw.pngComponent based software development is really about piecing different software components together.
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puzzle_pieces.jpgHowever, there are a lot of pieces out on the Internet. This makes selecting the right piece for your software system difficult.
  • * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Steve_Ballmer_-_MIX_2008.jpg* http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_Matthew_Stallman.jpeg
  • Web questionnaires (9+66 respondents)E-mail survey + 700 responsesSemi-structured interviews (16+23 respondents)The COSI project and case studies within this projectA Norwegian case study/survey with TelenorA systematic review of + 1500 publications on OSS, identifying 112 publications with empirical evidence on OSS adoption.
  • We have described how several organizations adopt OSSWe have found that industry-wide, this adoption is significant. However, pin-pointing the exact level of adoption will not benefit practice.We have developed a framework for how (software engineering wise) software-intensive organizations adopt OSS.These ways of adopting OSS may be overlapping, but they all present different benefits and challenges.
  • * First we have surveyed current status of research* How to benefit practitioners will be discussed in the implications* Empirical research on adoption of OSS has been limited, but it is increasing* Many of the publications are experience reports
  • * Cover a large number of topics.* However, few related studies, and the majority focus on “general adoption” topics* Majority of papers from the USA and Europe
  • * We describe how software developers actually select OSS components.* This is very developer-dependent, informal, and based on the developer's experience. Experience both personal and within the team
  • * To explain why the process is so informal, we have created a model for situated selection.This model shows that the selection process is part of a much larger situation, where the search space is determined by the developer, and where most important requirements come from his experience, and the specific context he is in.Much of the research on selection has tried to “force” selection into specific methods, and developed a number of general evaluation criteria. However, we find that there are often just a few evaluation criteria that are important. Experience is perhaps the most decisive one.
  • Many things outside the scope of what we have done that are relevant, but at the same time the scope could have been more clearly defined earlier on.Replication and extension could be: Closer observations More long term Other contexts Construction of tools
  • C1 Empirically grounded descriptions of how several organizations adopt OSS.C2 A systematic review of the literature on OSS adoption in organizations.C3 A classification framework presenting six ways of organizational OSS adoption, each with its particular benefits and challenges. The six ways include: deploying OSS products, using OSS CASE tools, integrating OSS components, participating in the development of OSS products, providing OSS products, and using OSS development practices.C4 Descriptions, based on empirical evidence, of the strategies and resources practitioners actually use to identify, evaluate, and select OSS components.C5 A model for situated software selection and its constraints, indicating why formalized selection methods have failed to see significant adoption.
  • * To benefit practitioners we have the following recommendations for OSS adoption researchers. In addition, we have created a list of topics that we believe should be useful for such researchers (see P8).

PhD Defense Øyvind Hauge Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Adoption ofOpenSource Software in
    Software-IntensiveIndustry
    PhDDefense Øyvind Hauge
    oyvind.hauge@idi.ntnu.no
    Øyvind Hauge, PhD Defence, 2010
  • 2. Focus
    • Empirical studies
    • 3. Software-intensive organizations
    • 4. Software engineering
  • Introduction and background
    Research
    Results and contributions
    Summary and implications
  • 5. What Is OSS?
    Software products that you may
    Run
    Study
    Modify
    Redistribute
    Often developed by distributed communities
  • 6. Why OSS?
    Software products worth billions of Euro
    Development practices that manage highly distributed development
    Grassroot movement that successfully involve large number of developers and users
  • 7. Topic 1: OSS Adoption
    “Both evidence and theory confirm that open source delivers better reliability, lower costs, shorter development times, and a higher quality of code (including better security)” (Raymond, 2004, p. 88).
    =
    Software engineering
  • 8. Existing research on OSS
    Limited, but increasing
    A lot of opinions and experience reports
    Focused on the communities (outside organizations) that developed OSS products
    von Krogh and von Hippel (2006), Scacchi et al. (2006), Feller et al. (2006), Stol and Ali Babar (2009)
  • 9. Topic 2: Software Selection
  • 10.
  • 11. Ayala (2008)
  • 12. Existing Research on Selection
    Formalized selection methods
    Rational decision making
    Quantifiable evaluation criteria
    Product
    Provider
    Influence on practice has been very limited
    Torchiano and Morisio (2004), Li et al. (2006), Mahmood et al. (2007), Land et al. (2008), Birkmeier and Overhage (2009)
  • 13. Introduction and background
    Research
    Results and contributions
    Summary and implications
  • 14. Research Questions
    RQ1: How and to what extent are software-intensive organizations currently adopting OSS?
    RQ2: What is the current status of research on OSS adoption in organizations and how may this research benefit practitioners?
    RQ3: Which strategies and resources do software developers use to identify, evaluate, and select OSS components?
  • 15.
  • 16. Introduction and background
    Research
    Results and contributions
    Summary and implications
  • 17. RQ1 -> Contribution C1 and C3
    Empirically grounded descriptions of how organizations adopt OSS
    OSS adoption is significant
  • 18. RQ2 -> Contribution C2
  • 19.
  • 20. RQ3 -> Contribution C4
    Identification
    Experience
    Monitoring and review of “trusted” sites
    Unstructured web-search
    Evaluation
    Experience
    Reviewing
    “Trusted” sites for experience reports
    Provider site for activity and documentation
    Unstructured web-search for experience reports
    Prototyping
  • 21. RQ3 -> Contribution C5
  • 22. Evaluation and limitations
    Positive
    Grounded in empirical evidence from the industry
    Extends previous research within the group
    Reliable and well documented
    Room for improvement
    Scope and focus
    Replication and extension particularly with richer data
    Improved understanding should be materialized
  • 23. Introduction and background
    Research
    Results and contributions
    Summary and implications
  • 24. Summary contributions
    A platform for future research on OSS adoption
    C1 Empirically grounded descriptions of how organizations adopt OSS
    C2 A systematic literature review of the OSS literature
    C3 A classification framework of how organizations adopt OSS
    Improve vocabulary
    Topics and direction for future research
    An empirical basis for software selection research
    C4 Empirically grounded descriptions of practices and resources
    C5 A model for situated software selection
  • 25. Implications
    OSS adoption
    Researchers should align their efforts, solve real industrial needs, and look to related areas for support
    Practitioners should not be afraid to exploit the benefits of OSS, but evaluate adoption in their own context
    Software selection
    Researchers should focus on supporting actual practice
    Practitioners should understand and use available informal knowledge sharing platforms
  • 26. References
    Claudia P. Ayala. Systematic Construction of Goal-Oriented COTS Taxonomies. PhD thesis, Technical University of Catalunya (UPC), 2008.
    Evangelia Berdou, Learning and the imperative of production in Free/Open Source development, in: Proceedings of the 3rd IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conference on Open Source Software (OSS2007) - Open Source Development, Adoption and Innovation, June 11th-14th, Limerick, Ireland, Limerick, Ireland, June 11-14, pages 235--240, Springer, 2007, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72486-7_21
    Dominik Birkmeier and Sven Overhage. On Component Identification Approaches – Classification, State of the Art, and Comparison. In Grace A. Lewis, Iman Poernomo, and Christine Hofmeister, editors, Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Component-Based Software Engineering (CBSE 2009), June 24th-26th, East Stroudsburg, USA, volume 5582/2009 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 1–18. Springer, 2009. ISBN 978-3-642-02413-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02414-6_1
    Wolf-Gideon Bleek and Matthias Finck, Ensuring Transparency -- Migrating a Closed Software Development to an Open Source Software Project, in: Proceedings of the 28th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia (IRIS'28), Kristiansand, Norway, 2005
    Cornelia Boldyreff, David Nutter and Stephen Rank, Communication and Conflict Issues in Coollaborative Software Research Projects, in: Collaboration, Conflict and Control Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering (WOSSE 2004), May 25th, Edinburgh, Scotland, pages 14--17, 2004
    Kristin Braa and Richard Vidgen, Interpretation, intervention, and reduction in the organizational laboratory: a framework for in-context information system research (1999), in: Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 9:1(25 – 47)
    Andrea Capiluppi, Patricia Lago and Maurizio Morisio, Characteristics of Open Source Projects, in: Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR '03), March 26th-28th, Benevento, Italy, pages 317-327, IEEE Computer Society, 2003
    Leonhard Dobusch, Migration Discourse Structures: Escaping Microsoft's Desktop Path, in: Proceedings of the 4th IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conferences on Open Source Software (OSS2008) - Open Source Development Communities and Quality, September 7th-10th, Milano, Italy, Milano, Italy September 7-10, pages 223--235, Springer, 2008
    Sigi Goode, Something for nothing: management rejection of open source software in Australia's top firms (2005), in: Information & Management, 42:5(669--681)
    Simon Grand, Georg von Krogh, Dorothy Leonard and Walter Swap, Resource allocation beyond firm boundaries: A multi-level model for Open Source innovation (2004), in: Long Range Planning, 37:6(591—610)
  • 27. References
    Joseph Feller, Patrick Finnegan, David Kelly and Maurice MacNamara, Developing Open Source Software: A Community-Based Analysis of Research, in: {Social Inclusion: Societal and Organizational Implications for Information Systems FIP TC8 WG 8.2 International Working Conference, July 12th-15th, Limerick, Ireland}, pages 261--278, Springer, 2006, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34588-4_18
    Brian Fitzgerald, The Transformation of Open Source Software (2006), in: MIS Quarterly, 30:3(587-598)
    ITEA Report on Open Source Software, Information Technology for European Advancement (ITEA), 2004
    Juha Järvensivu and Tommi Mikkonen, Forging A Community - Not: Experiences On Establishing An Open Source Project, in: Proceedings of the 4th IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conferences on Open Source Software (OSS2008) - Open Source Development Communities and Quality, September 7th-10th, Milano, Italy, pages 15--27, Springer, 2008
    Georg von Krogh and Eric von Hippel, The Promise of Research on Open Source Software (2006), in: Management Science, 52:7(975—983), http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0560
    Rikard Land, Lauren Blankers, Michel Chaudron, and Ivica Crnkovic. COTS Selection Best Practices in Literature and in Industry. In Hong Mei, editor, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Software Reuse (ICSR 2008), May 25th-29th, Beijing, China, volume 5030/2008 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 100–111. Springer, July 2008. ISBN 978-3-540-68062-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-68073-4_9
    Jingyue Li, Finn Olav Bjørnson, Reidar Conradi, and Vigdis By Kampenes. An Empirical Study of Variations in COTS-Based Software Development Processes in the Norwegian IT Industry. Empirical Software Engineering, 11(3):433–461, 2006a. ISSN 1382-3256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10664-006-9005-5
    Sajjad Mahmood, Richard Lai, and Y. S. Kim. Survey of component-based software development. IET Software, 1(2):57–66, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen:20060045
    Catharina Melian and Magnus Mähring, Lost and Gained in Translation: Adoption of Open Source Software Development at Hewlett-Packard, in: Proceedings of the 4th IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conferences on Open Source Software (OSS2008) - Open Source Development Communities and Quality, September 7th-10th, Milano, Italy, Milano, Italy, pages 93--104, Springer, 2008, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09684-1_8
    Eric S. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary, O'Reilly, 2001
    Eric S. Raymond. Up from Alchemy. IEEE Software, 21(1):88-90, 2004. ISSN 0740-7459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ms.2004.1259228
    Peter C. Rigby, Davor Cubranic, Suzanne Thompson, Daniel M. German and Margaret-Anne Storey, The challenges of creating open source educational software: the Gild experience, in: Proceedings of The First International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS2005), July 11th-15th, Genova, Italy, Genova, Italy, 11-15 July, pages 338-340, 2005
  • 28. References
    Walt Scacchi, Joseph Feller, Brian Fitzgerald, Scott A. Hissam and Karim R. Lakhani, Understanding Free/Open Source Software Development Processes (2006), in: Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 11:2(95—105), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/spip.255
    Klaas-Jan Stol and Muhammed Ali Babar, Reporting Empirical Research in Open Source Software: The State of Practice, in: {Proceedings of the 5th IFIP Working Group 2.13 International Conference on Open Source Systems (OSS2009) - Open Source Ecosystems: Diverse Communities, June 3rd-6th, Skövde, Sweden}, pages 156-169, Springer, 2009, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02032-2_15
    Marco Torchiano and Maurizio Morisio. Overlooked Aspects of COTS-Based Development. IEEE Software, 21(2):88–93, 2004. ISSN 0740-7459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ms.2004.1270770
    Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Applied Social Research Methods, 2003
    Thomas Østerlie, Problems and solutions: Maintaining and integrated system in a community of volunteers, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2009