PRIORITIZATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT: AN ACTION RESEARCH IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

2021 ◽  
pp. 244-257
Author(s):  
Alvaro Farias Pinheiro ◽  
Nilo Martins ◽  
Melina Soares ◽  
Geraldo Neto ◽  
Wylliams Santos
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Álvaro Pinheiro ◽  
Nilo Martins ◽  
Melina Soares ◽  
Geraldo Neto ◽  
Wylliams Santos

The prioritization of requirements is a critical activity in quality assurance. However, in public institutions, prioritization faces conflicts with financial constraints. Problem: Increasing the complexity of requirements. Objective: Proposition of a Kanban method to improve the transparency of activities and facilitate prioritization. Method: An action research carried out in two cycles at the Attorney General's Office of the State of Pernambuco, involving the development team and public managers. Result: The presentation of the method's effectiveness as a mechanism facilitating transparency and as a support to management in prioritization.


Author(s):  
Jocelyn Armarego

A review of studies of practitioners of software development reveals a depth of mismatch between their needs and formal education. The conclusion to be drawn is that industry has made a long-term shift in its requirements of graduates from technical subjects, laying emphasis on personal and affective attributes. Concern has been expressed that the underlying “socialisation” requirement for a graduate to achieve “working professional” status is very poorly addressed in formal education. After establishing a framework for comparison between information technology (IT) formal education and industry requirements, this chapter discusses an action research study based on applying nontraditional and innovative learning models to address mismatches identified. Results suggest that models which focus on independent learning and soft skills prepare students to enter industry with the ability to engage in the career-long, professional learning required for success in professional practice.


2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Przybyłek ◽  
Marta Albecka ◽  
Olga Springer ◽  
Wojciech Kowalski

AbstractIn today’s fast-paced world of rapid technological change, software development teams need to constantly revise their work practices. Not surprisingly, regular reflection on how to become more effective is perceived as one of the most important principles of Agile Software Development. Nevertheless, running an effective and enjoyable retrospective meeting is still a challenge in real environments. As reported by several studies, the Sprint Retrospective is an agile practice most likely to be implemented improperly or sacrificed when teams perform under pressure to deliver. To facilitate the implementation of the practice, some agile coaches have proposed to set up retrospective meetings in the form of retrospective games. However, there has been little research-based evidence to support the positive effects of retrospective games. Our aim is to investigate whether the adoption of retrospective games can improve retrospective meetings in general and lead to positive societal outcomes. In this paper, we report on an Action Research project in which we implemented six retrospective games in six Scrum teams that had experienced common retrospective problems. The received feedback indicates that the approach helped the teams to mitigate many of the “accidental difficulties” pertaining to the Sprint Retrospective, such as lack of structure, dullness, too many complaints, or unequal participation and made the meetings more productive to some degree. Moreover, depending on their individual preferences, different participants perceived different games as having a positive impact on their communication, motivation-and-involvement, and/or creativity, even though there were others, less numerous, who had an opposite view. The advantages and disadvantages of each game as well as eight lessons learned are presented in the paper.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 57-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesper B. Berger ◽  
Jeremy Rose

Action research is widespread in many of the background disciplines that underpin the e-Government field and is beginning to take root as a legitimate e-Government research method. Canonical Action Research (CAR) is the most widely used form of action research; however it relies on premises that can be problematic in the e-Government context. This article details some of those underlying assumptions, and shows the difficulties that result when applied to a relatively typical e-Government case study: the implementation of an advanced email system in Danish public administration. The empirical experience calls many of the standard premises into question, and these are categorised. The authors summarize the resulting experience as nine challenges for action researchers working in the e-Government field, and investigate some possible responses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document