Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Usman Wajid: Service-based Application Development by Ordinary End Users and IT Professionals

906 views

Published on

Usman Wajid: Service-based Application Development by Ordinary End Users and IT Professionals

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Usman Wajid: Service-based Application Development by Ordinary End Users and IT Professionals

  1. 1. Service-based Application Development by Ordinary End Users and IT Professionals Usman Wajid University of Manchester 13-15 December 2010 ServiceWave 2010
  2. 2. <ul><li>Authors </li></ul><ul><li>Abdallah Namoun, University of Manchester </li></ul><ul><li>Usman Wajid, University of Manchester </li></ul><ul><li>Nikolay Mehandjiev, University of Manchester </li></ul>ServiceWave 2009 13-15 December 2010
  3. 3. Overview <ul><li>Motivation </li></ul><ul><li>Focus groups </li></ul><ul><li>Procedure </li></ul><ul><li>Materials </li></ul><ul><li>Results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Risks and benefits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Problems of Service Composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Guidelines to promote Service Composition </li></ul></ul>13-15 December 2010
  4. 4. Motivation <ul><li>The need to create easy to develop or customise service based applications </li></ul><ul><li>A small number of software developers in comparison to the number of end users (consumers) </li></ul><ul><li>Current practices and tools to develop software services are complex </li></ul><ul><li>We need to enable end users (e.g. domain experts) to develop applications by providing user-friendly tools </li></ul><ul><li>We need to consider users expectations as regards the costs and benefits of developing applications </li></ul>13-15 December 2010
  5. 5. Focus Groups <ul><li>We aimed to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>capture and contrast mental models of both ordinary end users and IT professionals about service composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>understand likelihood of uptake of service-based application development </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Target end users: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ordinary end users (MBS Students) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IT Professionals (from industrial firms and IT companies) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Five focus group sessions in total </li></ul><ul><ul><li>3 sessions with students (included 35 participants) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2 sessions with IT professionals (included 29 participants) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Each session lasted approximately 1 hour </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Discussion groups contained at most 5 participants each </li></ul></ul>13-15 December 2010
  6. 6. Procedure of the Focus Groups <ul><li>Define software services and fill in a participant background form </li></ul><ul><li>Attend a 20-minute presentation about software services and service composition; this was facilitated by examples and figures </li></ul><ul><li>Complete a subjective service composition questionnaire to capture initial opinions and rating of service composition aspects </li></ul><ul><li>Discuss potential risks and benefits of service composition by users </li></ul><ul><li>Discuss potential composition-related problems </li></ul><ul><li>Suggest potential solutions to overcome the identified problems </li></ul>13-15 December 2010
  7. 7. Materials <ul><li>Introductory presentation “The Internet of Services” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Explained the concept of service composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provided examples of software services and service composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Presented the aim of the SOA4All project </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Questionnaire focused on three aspects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Users’ service composition experience </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Users’ rating of various aspects of service composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Users’ opinions on ways for supporting service composition </li></ul></ul>23-27 November 2009
  8. 8. Results – Users’ background <ul><li>Ratings were performed on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1= disagree and 5= agree </li></ul><ul><li>IT professionals’ experience was significantly higher than end users’ in: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>software development (f(1, 62)= 54.64, p<0.001), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>web service development (f(1, 62))= 24.06, p<0.001), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>with analysis and design notations (f(1, 62)= 14.32, p<0.001), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>service composition (f(1, 61)= 9.15, p<0.01) </li></ul></ul>13-15 December 2010
  9. 9. Users’ Mental Models of Software Services 13-15 December 2010
  10. 10. Rating of Service Composition <ul><li>Ratings revealed: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>High interest in service composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Agreement that service composition is useful </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>As apposed to end users, IT Professionals believed that service composition is more error-prone and disagreed that it is easy to achieve (Anova tests were significant) </li></ul></ul>13-15 December 2010
  11. 11. Ratings of Service Composition <ul><li>Rating of ways of supporting and encouraging service composition </li></ul>13-15 December 2010
  12. 12. Risks and Benefits of Service Composition <ul><li>We used thematic analysis to create risk and benefit categories from the collected data </li></ul><ul><li>End users: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>7.2% of the topics covered benefits of Service Composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Usefulness of reusing composition knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Efficiency of Service Composition (e.g. saves time) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Tailorability to one’s needs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>25.5% of the topics covered risks of Service Composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Privacy and security of personal information (46% of the risk responses) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Technical difficulty </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>IT Professionals </li></ul><ul><ul><li>7.5% of the topics covered benefits of Service Composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Efficiency of Service Composition </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Income generation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>37.7% of the topics covered risks of Service Composition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Data privacy (21% of the risk responses) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Security and trust issues (24% of the risk responses) </li></ul></ul></ul>13-15 December 2010
  13. 13. Problems of Service Composition <ul><li>Complexity of software services </li></ul><ul><li>Compatibility of software services and data resources </li></ul><ul><li>Composition/development steps </li></ul><ul><li>Composition for everyone </li></ul><ul><li>User-interface related issues </li></ul>13-15 December 2010
  14. 14. Preliminary Model of Service Composition Uptake by End Users 13-15 December 2010
  15. 15. Recommendations for Service Composition <ul><li>Guideline 1 : Promote service composition awareness </li></ul><ul><li>Guideline 2 : Simplify service composition </li></ul><ul><li>Guideline 3 : Guide service composition </li></ul><ul><li>Guideline 4 : Specialize service composition platforms </li></ul><ul><li>Guideline 5 : Secure services and service composition </li></ul>13-15 December 2010
  16. 16. Thank you for your attention 13-15 December 2010
  17. 17. ICSOC-ServiceWave 2009

×