软件开发动态众包

Alpana Dubey, K. Abhinav, Sakshi Taneja, G. Virdi, Anurag Dwarakanath, A. Kass, Mani Suma Kuriakose
{"title":"软件开发动态众包","authors":"Alpana Dubey, K. Abhinav, Sakshi Taneja, G. Virdi, Anurag Dwarakanath, A. Kass, Mani Suma Kuriakose","doi":"10.1109/ICGSE.2016.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of online labor markets has concentrated a lot of attention on the prospect of using crowdsourcing for software development, with a potential to reduce costs, improve time-to-market, and access high-quality skills on demand. However, crowdsourcing of software development is still not widely adopted. A key barrier to adoption is a lack of confidence that a task will be completed on time with the required quality standards. While good managers can develop good, intuitive estimates of task completion when assigning work to their team members, they might lack similar intuition for individuals drawn from an online crowd. The phrase, \"Post and Hope\" is thus sometimes used when talking about the crowdsourcing of software-development tasks. The objective of this paper is to show the value of replacing the traditional, intuitive assessment of a team's capability with a quantitative assessment of the crowd, derived through analysis of historical performance on similar tasks. This analysis will serve to transform \"Post and Hope\" to \"Post and Expect.\" We demonstrate this by analyzing data about tasks performed on two popular crowdsourcing platforms: Topcoder and Upwork. Analysis of historical data from these platforms indicates that the platforms indeed demonstrate some level of predictability in task completion. We have identified certain factors that consistently contribute to task completion on both the platforms. Our findings suggest that a data-driven decision processes can play an important role in successful adoption of crowdsourcing practice for software development.","PeriodicalId":437860,"journal":{"name":"2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)","volume":"68 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dynamics of Software Development Crowdsourcing\",\"authors\":\"Alpana Dubey, K. Abhinav, Sakshi Taneja, G. Virdi, Anurag Dwarakanath, A. Kass, Mani Suma Kuriakose\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICGSE.2016.13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The emergence of online labor markets has concentrated a lot of attention on the prospect of using crowdsourcing for software development, with a potential to reduce costs, improve time-to-market, and access high-quality skills on demand. However, crowdsourcing of software development is still not widely adopted. A key barrier to adoption is a lack of confidence that a task will be completed on time with the required quality standards. While good managers can develop good, intuitive estimates of task completion when assigning work to their team members, they might lack similar intuition for individuals drawn from an online crowd. The phrase, \\\"Post and Hope\\\" is thus sometimes used when talking about the crowdsourcing of software-development tasks. The objective of this paper is to show the value of replacing the traditional, intuitive assessment of a team's capability with a quantitative assessment of the crowd, derived through analysis of historical performance on similar tasks. This analysis will serve to transform \\\"Post and Hope\\\" to \\\"Post and Expect.\\\" We demonstrate this by analyzing data about tasks performed on two popular crowdsourcing platforms: Topcoder and Upwork. Analysis of historical data from these platforms indicates that the platforms indeed demonstrate some level of predictability in task completion. We have identified certain factors that consistently contribute to task completion on both the platforms. Our findings suggest that a data-driven decision processes can play an important role in successful adoption of crowdsourcing practice for software development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":437860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)\",\"volume\":\"68 5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2016.13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICGSE.2016.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

在线劳动力市场的出现将大量注意力集中在使用众包进行软件开发的前景上,这有可能降低成本,缩短上市时间,并根据需要获得高质量的技能。然而,软件开发的众包仍然没有被广泛采用。采用的一个关键障碍是缺乏对任务将按要求的质量标准按时完成的信心。虽然优秀的管理者在给团队成员分配工作时,可以对任务完成情况做出良好的、直观的估计,但对于从网络人群中抽取的个人,他们可能缺乏类似的直觉。因此,在谈论软件开发任务的众包时,有时会使用“Post and Hope”这个短语。本文的目的是展示用对人群的定量评估取代传统的、直观的团队能力评估的价值,这种评估是通过分析类似任务的历史表现得出的。这种分析有助于将“Post and Hope”转变为“Post and Expect”。我们通过分析在两个流行的众包平台:Topcoder和Upwork上执行的任务数据来证明这一点。对这些平台历史数据的分析表明,这些平台确实在任务完成方面表现出一定程度的可预测性。我们已经确定了在两个平台上始终有助于任务完成的某些因素。我们的研究结果表明,数据驱动的决策过程可以在成功采用软件开发的众包实践中发挥重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dynamics of Software Development Crowdsourcing
The emergence of online labor markets has concentrated a lot of attention on the prospect of using crowdsourcing for software development, with a potential to reduce costs, improve time-to-market, and access high-quality skills on demand. However, crowdsourcing of software development is still not widely adopted. A key barrier to adoption is a lack of confidence that a task will be completed on time with the required quality standards. While good managers can develop good, intuitive estimates of task completion when assigning work to their team members, they might lack similar intuition for individuals drawn from an online crowd. The phrase, "Post and Hope" is thus sometimes used when talking about the crowdsourcing of software-development tasks. The objective of this paper is to show the value of replacing the traditional, intuitive assessment of a team's capability with a quantitative assessment of the crowd, derived through analysis of historical performance on similar tasks. This analysis will serve to transform "Post and Hope" to "Post and Expect." We demonstrate this by analyzing data about tasks performed on two popular crowdsourcing platforms: Topcoder and Upwork. Analysis of historical data from these platforms indicates that the platforms indeed demonstrate some level of predictability in task completion. We have identified certain factors that consistently contribute to task completion on both the platforms. Our findings suggest that a data-driven decision processes can play an important role in successful adoption of crowdsourcing practice for software development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Scaling Scrum in a Large Globally Distributed Organization: A Case Study Findings on AGSD Architectural Knowledge Sharing Using Architectural Constraints to Drive Software Component Reuse While Adding and Enhancing Features: In a Global Software Engineering Team Enabling Knowledge Sharing in Agile Virtual Teams MONO: A Computer-Supported Cooperative Tool for Digital Content Software Projects
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1