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

Lidia López

Lidia López contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close 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

2 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

QFL: Data-Driven Feedback Loop to Manage Quality in Agile Development

Background: Quality requirements (QRs) describe desired system qualities, playing an important role in the success of software projects. In the context of agile software development (ASD), where the main objective is the fast delivery of functionalities, QRs are often ill-defined and not well addressed during the development process. Software analytics tools help to control quality though the measurement of quality-related software aspects to support decision-makers in the process of QR management. Aim: The goal of this research is to explore the benefits of integrating a concrete software analytics tool, Q-Rapids Tool, to assess software quality and support QR management processes. Method: In the context of a technology transfer project, the Softeam company has integrated Q-Rapids Tool in their development process. We conducted a series of workshops involving Softeam members working in the Modelio product development. Results: We present the Quality Feedback Loop (QFL) process to be integrated in software development processes to control the complete QR life-cycle, from elicitation to validation. As a result of the implementation of QFL in Softeam, Modelio's team members highlight the benefits of integrating a data analytics tool with their project planning tool and the fact that project managers can control the whole process making the final decisions. Conclusions: Practitioners can benefit from the integration of software analytics tools as part of their software development toolchain to control software quality. The implementation of QFL promotes quality in the organization and the integration of software analytics and project planning tools also improves the communication between teams.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

The State-of-Practice in Requirements Elicitation: An Extended Interview Study at 12 Companies

Context. Requirements engineering remains a discipline that is faced with a large number of challenges, including the implementation of a requirements elicitation process in industry. Although several proposals have been suggested by researchers and academics, little is known of the practices that are actually followed in industry. Objective. We investigate the SoTA with respect to requirements elicitation, examining practitioners' practices. We focus on the techniques, the roles involved, and the challenges associated to the process. Method. We conducted an interview-based survey study involving 24 practitioners from 12 different Swedish IT companies. Results. We found that group interaction techniques, including meetings and workshops, are the most popular type of elicitation techniques that are employed by the practitioners, except in the case of small projects. We noted that customers are frequently involved in the elicitation process, except in the case of market-driven organizations. Technical staff (for example, developers and architects) are more frequently involved in the elicitation process compared to the involvement of business- or strategic staff. Finally, we identified a number of challenges with respect to stakeholders. These challenges include difficulties in understanding and prioritizing their needs. Further, it was noted that requirements instability (i.e., caused by changing needs or priorities) was a predominant challenge. These observations need to be interpreted in the context of the study. Conclusion. The relevant observations regarding the survey participants' experiences should be of interest to the industry; experiences that should be analyzed in the practitioners' context. Researchers may find evidence for the use of academic results in practice, thereby inspiring future theoretical work, as well as further empirical studies in the same area.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access