International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, Volume-3, Issue -11, 2015 43
“Lean software development: Review of Survey conducted in SME’s”
1Piyush Kumar Pareek, 2A.N.Nandakumar
1,2Computer Science & Engineering, Jain University, Bengaluru, India
Abstract : Lean software development has often been described as “better, faster, and cheaper” and focused on
“eliminating waste, going after speed improvement and waste elimination can actually reduce the benefits you might otherwise get from lean. Employing lean principles, you optimize the whole, eliminate delays, improve collaboration, deliver value quickly, create effective ecosystems for development, push decisions to the people doing the work, and build integrity in. Lean software development has attracted a great deal of attention during last years. A study has been carried out with respect to wastes in software in small and medium software firms with less than 100 employees in Bengaluru, This paper is an attempt to bring into light the effect of three categories of wastes on performance of the company.
Keywords: Lean software development, eliminating waste, small & medium level software companies.
I. INTRODUCTION
As web based-applications become increasingly important to all aspects of life, there is a need to encourage practitioners to adopt best practices so as to improve the quality of the processes in use, and therefore achieve targets related to time, budget and quality. The web development industry worldwide is dominated by a myriad of small firms. This presents a challenge in terms of determining the current practices of industry participants, and in devising improvement initiatives which are feasible for small firms.
Modified XP codifies a set of practices that many web developers are willing to adopt in both action and spirit.
Many of these practices are grounded in fundamental project management theory. When software development teams embrace the practices of Extreme Programming an opportunity is created for a broad set of project management practices to become meaningful and accessible to the developers, while at the same time making clear, unambiguous information available to the project managers. (Haroon Altarawneh 2008: 125-132) Small software firms find themselves in highly complex and turbulent environments that require dynamic capabilities to build, integrate, and reconfigure resources. While the literature describes a portfolio of dynamic capabilities that can help the small software firms in adaptation, there are no comprehensive approaches available. We use a sense-and-respond framework as a lens to study the dynamic capabilities in
two software firms, Starter Inc. and Mature Inc. The framework integrated the activity- and firm-level capabilities related to input, process, and output of software development. The framework also revealed important variations in sense-and-respond practices as a reflection of differences in maturity between the two firms. We argue that the framework offered a comprehensive and useful approach to understand the dynamic capabilities in the two firms, and on that basis we suggest the principles for how managers can apply the framework to small software firms
At Starter Inc. and Mature Inc., the sense-and-respond approach helped to identify and assess core dynamic capabilities. The analysis helped us to appreciate enablers and barriers to appropriate sense-and-respond behavior. We learned that certain organizational designs and management practices were more feasible than others. For instance, by decentralizing into smaller and quick-responding teams coordinated by shared values and goals, small software companies can use their limited and tightly scheduled resources to anticipate individual customer needs and respond more quickly through mass customization. Also, the ability to integrate services with relevant complementary offerings through partnerships within business networks reduces the dependencies on large and powerful players within the industry (Lars Mathiassen, Marianne Vainio.2007:522-538)
II. RESULT & ANALYSIS
Research question: To explore the effect of Waste # 1:
Partially done work in small & medium enterprises with awareness of Lean as independent variable.
The analysis of variance technique helps to draw inferences whether the samples have been drawn from population having the same mean, In general the ANOVA techniques investigate any number of factors which are supposed to influence the dependent variable of interest. It is also possible to investigate the differences in various categories within each of these factors.
H01: Partially done work has no effect on missing the software deadlines
International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, Volume-3, Issue -11, 2015 44
H1: Partially done work effects in meeting software deadlines
Dependent Variable
Level Anova
Awareness of Lean N Mean Std.Deviation F Sig Prioritizing a requirement
without having complete information about it.
Yes 192 3.22 1.225
0.001 0.981***
No 108 3.22 1.233
Total 300 3.22 1.226
Technical complexity that was not analyzed properly during Designing Phase
Yes 192 3.67 1.331
0.39 0.843
No 108 3.7 1.334
Total 300 3.68 1.33
Wait time between the tasks that are identified to complete
different modules
Yes 192 3.83 0.9
0 1 ***
No 108 3.83 0.902
Total 300 3.83 0.899
Improper dependencies and relationships defined
Yes 192 3.35 1.436
0.009 0.925
No 108 3.37 1.425
Total 300 3.36 1.43
Customer Awareness
Yes 192 3.88 0.929
0.002 0.967
No 108 3.88 0.924
Total 300 3.88 0.926
The rate of defect repair is underestimated
Yes 192 3.88 0.929
0.002 0.967
No 108 3.87 0.938
Total 300 3.87 0.931
Required training for staff is unavailable
Yes 192 3.02 1.253
0.019 0.89
No 108 3 1.253
Total 300 3.01 1.251
Lack of specifications of essential interfaces on
schedule
Yes 192 3.67 0.945
0 1***
No 108 3.67 0.947
Total 300 3.67 0.944
CASE tools which support the project do not perform as
anticipated
Yes 192 2.63 1.222
0.001 0.975***
No 108 2.62 1.221
Total 300 2.62 1.219
Above Table indicates the dependent variables which are here different factors related to first category of waste i.e. partially done work with respect to level of awareness of lean are tested using one way Analysis of Variance. Totally nine factors were considered and included for the study and the results indicate that Prioritizing a requirement without having complete information about it, Wait time between the tasks that are identified to complete different modules, Lack of specifications of essential interfaces on schedule,CASE tools which support the project do not perform as anticipated were not significant when compared to other factors & Other factors like Technical complexity that was not analyzed properly during Designing Phase , Improper dependencies and relationships defined ,
Customer Awareness , The rate of defect repair is underestimated&Required training for staff is unavailable were significant.
From the above table and interpretation it can be reasonably justified that, the effect of Partially done work in small & medium enterprises has significant effect on the software firms Hence the alternative hypothesis H1 Partially done work effects in meeting software deadlines is accepted negatively effects industrial dynamics from the perspective of respondents is proved.
Research question 2: To explore the effect of Waste # 2:
Extra Features in small & medium enterprises with awareness of Lean as independent variable.
International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, Volume-3, Issue -11, 2015 45
H02: Delivering extra features has no adverse effect on meeting deadlines
H2: Delivering extra features effects on meeting deadlines
Dependent Variable
Level Anova
F Sig
Awareness of Lean
N Mean Std.
Deviation Customers are not always aware that
they are expected to make a considerable contribution to the realization of a project.
Yes 192 3.88 0.929
0.002 0.967***
No 108 3.88 0.924
Total 300 3.88 0.926
Lack of understanding the software vision
Yes 192 3.97 1.005
0.019 0.889
No 108 3.99 0.991
Total 300 3.98 0.998
The expansion of functionality in which new functionalities continue to be conceived and requested as the project proceeds. The software can never be completed in this way.
Yes 192 4.16 0.691
0.016 0.9***
No 108 4.17 0.69
Total 300 4.16 0.69
Programmers and designers try to make many details of the software or design too elaborate. Much time is spent improving details, even though the improvements were not requested by the customer or client.
Yes 192 3.19 1.166
0.021 0.886
No 108 3.21 1.176
Total 300 3.2 1.168
Above Table indicates the dependent variables which are here different factors related to second category of waste i.e. extra features with respect to level of awareness of lean are tested using one way Analysis of Variance. Totally four factors were considered and included for the study and the results indicate that Customers are not always aware that they are expected to make a considerable contribution to the realization of a project & The expansion of functionality in which new functionalities continue to be conceived and requested as the project proceeds. The software can never be completed in this way were not significant when compared to other factors. Other factors like Lack of understanding the software vision&Programmers and designers try to make many details of the software or design too elaborate. Much time is spent improving details, even though the improvements were not requested by the customer or client were significant.
From the above table and interpretation it can be reasonably justified that, the effect providing extra features moderately effects adversely to the company as many a times in different situations it has led to conflicts and delays Hence the alternative hypothesis H2 Delivering extra features effects on meeting deadlines being significant from the perspective of respondents is proved.
Research question 3: To explore the effect of Waste # 3:
Relearning during software development life cycle causes delays in delivering the product in small &
medium enterprises with awareness of Lean as independent variable.
H03 : Relearning doesn’t effect on missing the software deadlines
H3 : Relearning effects in meeting software deadlines
Dependent Variable
Level
Anova
F Sig
N Mean Std.
Deviation Aware of Lean
Lack of understanding the software target audience
Yes 192 3.4 1.278
0 0.985***
No 108 3.4 1.297
Total 300 3.4 1.283
Lack of proper knowledge – sharing process within the team
Yes 192 3.25 1.202
0.037 0.848
No 108 3.22 1.21
International Journal of Recent Advances in Engineering & Technology (IJRAET)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________
ISSN (Online): 2347 - 2812, Volume-3, Issue -11, 2015 46
Total 300 3.24 1.203
Lack of required
documentation
Yes 192 3.31 1.08
0.017 0.897
No 108 3.32 1.066
Total 300 3.31 1.073
Overly optimistic schedules place considerable pressure on the project team.
Yes 192 3.7 0.886
0.071 0.79
No 108 3.73 0.882
Total 300 3.71 0.883
Above Table indicates the dependent variables which are here different factors related to third category of waste i.e. partially done work with respect to level of awareness of lean are tested using one way Analysis of Variance. Totally four factors were considered and included for the study and the results indicate that Lack of understanding the software target audience were not significant when compared to other factors. Other factors like Lack of proper knowledge – sharing process within the team, Lack of required documentation &
overly optimistic schedules place considerable pressure on the project team were significant.
From the above table and interpretation it can be reasonably justified that, the effect of relearning causes lot of delays in delivering the software in many situations observed .The lead time increases leading to missing of deadlines. Hence the alternative hypothesis H3 Relearning effects in meeting software deadlines being significant from the perspective of respondents is proved.
REFERENCES
[1] Haroon Altarawneh, Aseem EI Shiekh.2008. ‘ A Theoretical Agile Process Framework for web applications development in small software firms’ in Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications ,IEEE Computer Society.125- 132
[2] Lars Mathiassen, Marianne Vainio.2007.
‘Dynamic Capabilities in Small Software Firms:
A Sense-and-Respond Approach’ in IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, VOL.
54, NO. 3, AUGUST 2007, 522-538
[3] Norshidah Mohamed, Ramlah Hussein et al 2009. ‘A Descriptive Analysis of IT Adoption in Malaysian Small Software Firms’ in IEEE 275- 278
[4] Aileen P Cater-Steel .2004. ‘Low-rigour, Rapid Software Process Assessments for Small Software Development Firms’ in Australian Software Engineering Conference IEEE, 15304- 0803/04
[5] Malek Ahmad TheebAlmomani, ShuibBasri.
2015. ‘Software Process Improvement Initiatives in Small and Medium Firms: A Systematic Review’ in 2014 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Science Applications and Technologies, IEEE .162-167
[6] Kyootai Lee, Kailash Joshi. 2011. ‘How Can Executives/entrepreneurs in Small to Medium Sized Software Enterprises Leverage Partnerships with Large Firms? ’ in IEEE Int'l Technology Management Conference 1001-1006.
[7] Stewart Whittemore .2012. ‘Small Text, Big Effects: How a Technical Communicator Used Writing to Influence Design Decisions in a Software Firm’ in IEEE 978-1-4577-2126-7/12
