BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Diana Kirk

Diana Kirk contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
1topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Categorising Software Contexts: Research-in-Progress

A growing number of researchers suggest that software process must be tailored to a project's context to achieve maximal performance. Researchers have studied 'context' in an ad-hoc way, with focus on those contextual factors that appear to be of significance. The result is that we have no useful basis upon which to contrast and compare studies. We are currently researching a theoretical basis for software context for the purpose of tailoring and note that a deeper consideration of the meaning of the term 'context' is required before we can proceed. In this paper, we examine the term and present a model based on insights gained from our initial categorisation of contextual factors from the literature. We test our understanding by analysing a further six documents. Our contribution thus far is a model that we believe will support a theoretical operationalisation of software context for the purpose of process tailoring.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Investigating a Conceptual Construct for Software Context

A growing number of empirical software engineering researchers suggest that a complementary focus on theory is required if the discipline is to mature. A first step in theory-building involves the establishment of suitable theoretical constructs. For researchers studying software projects, the lack of a theoretical construct for context is problematic for both experimentation and effort estimation. For experiments, insufficiently understood contextual factors confound results, and for estimation, unstated contextual factors affect estimation reliability. We have earlier proposed a framework that we suggest may be suitable as a construct for context i.e. represents a minimal, spanning set for the space of software contexts. The framework has six dimensions, described as Who, Where, What, When, How and Why. In this paper, we report the outcomes of a pilot study to test its suitability by categorising contextual factors from the software engineering literature into the framework. We found that one of the dimensions, Why, does not represent context, but rather is associated with objectives. We also identified some factors that do not clearly fit into the framework and require further investigation. Our contributions are the pursuing of a theoretical approach to understanding software context, the initial establishment and evaluation of a construct for context and the exposure of a lack of clarity of meaning in many 'contexts' currently applied as factors for estimating project outcomes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Progress Report on a Proposed Theory for Software Development

There is growing acknowledgement within the software engineering community that a theory of software development is needed to integrate the myriad methodologies that are currently popular, some of which are based on opposing perspectives. We have been developing such a theory for a number of years. In this position paper, we overview our theory along with progress made thus far. We suggest that, once fully developed, this theory, or one similar to it, may be applied to support situated software development, by providing an overarching model within which software initiatives might be categorised and understood. Such understanding would inevitably lead to greater predictability with respect to outcomes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

A Model for Software Contexts

It is widely acknowledged by researchers and practitioners that software development methodologies are generally adapted to suit specific project contexts. Research into practices-as-implemented has been fragmented and has tended to focus either on the strength of adherence to a specific methodology or on how the efficacy of specific practices is affected by contextual factors. We submit the need for a more holistic, integrated approach to investigating context-related best practice. We propose a six-dimensional model of the problem-space, with dimensions organisational drivers (why), space and time (where), culture (who), product life-cycle stage (when), product constraints (what) and engagement constraints (how). We test our model by using it to describe and explain a reported implementation study. Our contributions are a novel approach to understanding situated software practices and a preliminary model for software contexts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Consolidating a Model for Describing Situated Software Practices

Many prescriptive approaches to developing software intensive systems have been advocated but each is based on assumptions about context. It has been found that practitioners do not follow prescribed methodologies, but rather select and adapt specific practices according to local needs. As researchers, we would like to be in a position to support such tailoring. However, at the present time we simply do not have sufficient evidence relating practice and context for this to be possible. We have long understood that a deeper understanding of situated software practices is crucial for progress in this area, and have been exploring this problem from a number of perspectives. In this position paper, we draw together the various aspects of our work into a holistic model and discuss the ways in which the model might be applied to support the long term goal of evidence-based decision support for practitioners. The contribution specific to this paper is a discussion on model evaluation, including a proof-of-concept demonstration of model utility. We map Kernel elements from the Essence system to our model and discuss gaps and limitations exposed in the Kernel. Finally, we overview our plans for further refining and evaluating the model.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access