边界人工制品信任的因果研究

R. Ouriques, Fabian Fagerholm, Daniel Mendez, Baldvin Gislason Bern
{"title":"边界人工制品信任的因果研究","authors":"R. Ouriques, Fabian Fagerholm, Daniel Mendez, Baldvin Gislason Bern","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4253491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Boundary Artefacts (BAs) support software development activities in many aspects because it carries lots of information in the same object that can be used and interpreted by several social groups within an organisation. When the BAs are inconsistent regarding their content, such as many meanings or lack of contextual information, their efficiency is reduced because stakeholders will not trust them. Objective: This study aimed to understand the implications of differences in the perception of trust on software projects and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Methods: We conducted an exploratory case study to observe the creation and utilisation of one specific BA and the implications of differences in trust and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Results : Our investigation has shown that practitioners adding and adjusting existing content do not entirely understand the stakeholders’ needs. Together with the partial management of the content, trust is impacted. When the content of BAs does not meet the trust factors, specifically reliability and predictability, the stakeholders cannot execute their tasks appropriately, and several implications affect the software development project. Additionally, they create workarounds to supply their needs. Conclusion: The differences in trust in BAs affect software projects in different areas of the organisation and interfere with the task execution of various stakeholders. The decrease in trust results from inconsistencies in the content associated with the lack of management of the BA. A structured strategy for representing and managing a BA’s content seems appropriate to increase trust levels and efficiency.","PeriodicalId":133352,"journal":{"name":"Inf. Softw. Technol.","volume":"466 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An investigation of causes and effects of trust in Boundary Artefacts\",\"authors\":\"R. Ouriques, Fabian Fagerholm, Daniel Mendez, Baldvin Gislason Bern\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.4253491\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: Boundary Artefacts (BAs) support software development activities in many aspects because it carries lots of information in the same object that can be used and interpreted by several social groups within an organisation. When the BAs are inconsistent regarding their content, such as many meanings or lack of contextual information, their efficiency is reduced because stakeholders will not trust them. Objective: This study aimed to understand the implications of differences in the perception of trust on software projects and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Methods: We conducted an exploratory case study to observe the creation and utilisation of one specific BA and the implications of differences in trust and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Results : Our investigation has shown that practitioners adding and adjusting existing content do not entirely understand the stakeholders’ needs. Together with the partial management of the content, trust is impacted. When the content of BAs does not meet the trust factors, specifically reliability and predictability, the stakeholders cannot execute their tasks appropriately, and several implications affect the software development project. Additionally, they create workarounds to supply their needs. Conclusion: The differences in trust in BAs affect software projects in different areas of the organisation and interfere with the task execution of various stakeholders. The decrease in trust results from inconsistencies in the content associated with the lack of management of the BA. A structured strategy for representing and managing a BA’s content seems appropriate to increase trust levels and efficiency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":133352,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inf. Softw. Technol.\",\"volume\":\"466 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inf. Softw. Technol.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4253491\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inf. Softw. Technol.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4253491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

上下文:边界工件(BAs)在许多方面支持软件开发活动,因为它在同一个对象中携带了许多信息,这些信息可以被组织内的几个社会团体使用和解释。当BAs的内容不一致时,例如许多含义或缺乏上下文信息,它们的效率就会降低,因为涉众不会信任它们。目的:本研究旨在了解软件项目信任感知差异的含义及其对利益相关者行为的影响。方法:我们进行了一个探索性案例研究,以观察一个特定BA的创建和使用,以及信任差异的含义及其对利益相关者行为的影响。结果:我们的调查显示,从业者增加和调整现有内容并没有完全理解利益相关者的需求。再加上内容的部分管理,信任受到了影响。当BAs的内容不满足信任因素,特别是可靠性和可预测性时,涉众就不能适当地执行他们的任务,并且会影响软件开发项目。此外,他们还会创建变通方法来满足自己的需求。结论:ba的信任差异会影响组织不同领域的软件项目,并干扰各种利益相关者的任务执行。信任的下降是由于缺乏BA管理导致的内容不一致。表示和管理BA内容的结构化策略似乎适合于提高信任级别和效率。
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
An investigation of causes and effects of trust in Boundary Artefacts
Context: Boundary Artefacts (BAs) support software development activities in many aspects because it carries lots of information in the same object that can be used and interpreted by several social groups within an organisation. When the BAs are inconsistent regarding their content, such as many meanings or lack of contextual information, their efficiency is reduced because stakeholders will not trust them. Objective: This study aimed to understand the implications of differences in the perception of trust on software projects and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Methods: We conducted an exploratory case study to observe the creation and utilisation of one specific BA and the implications of differences in trust and their influence on stakeholders’ behaviour. Results : Our investigation has shown that practitioners adding and adjusting existing content do not entirely understand the stakeholders’ needs. Together with the partial management of the content, trust is impacted. When the content of BAs does not meet the trust factors, specifically reliability and predictability, the stakeholders cannot execute their tasks appropriately, and several implications affect the software development project. Additionally, they create workarounds to supply their needs. Conclusion: The differences in trust in BAs affect software projects in different areas of the organisation and interfere with the task execution of various stakeholders. The decrease in trust results from inconsistencies in the content associated with the lack of management of the BA. A structured strategy for representing and managing a BA’s content seems appropriate to increase trust levels and efficiency.
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
Robustness assessment of hyperspectral image CNNs using metamorphic testing Towards accurate recommendations of merge conflicts resolution strategies Characteristics and generative mechanisms of software development productivity distributions Can An Old Fashioned Feature Extraction and A Light-weight Model Improve Vulnerability Type Identification Performance? Learning Test-Mutant Relationship for Accurate Fault Localisation
×
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