preliminary results cbse state of practice and experience survey

Preliminary Results

CBSE State of Practice and Experience SurveyCBSE State of Practice and Experience Survey

Budapest April 3-4 Component-Based Software Engineering Workshop 2

Why a State of the Practice Survey?Why a State of the Practice Survey?

CBSE landscape

State of the practice

Future challenges

Survey

Workshops

Partners experience


Trends Over a 5 Years PeriodTrends Over a 5 Years Period

20012002,2003

2004,2005

Paul Allen. Component Based Development Strategies. Monthly newsletter from Cutter Information Corp. Vol XI, No 11 and 12.


Sample CharacteristicsSample Characteristics

So far 100 organisations

125 to 150 expected

European results mainly

Europe

71%

North America

17%

South America

3%

Asia

8%

Oceania

1%


Sample CharacteristicsSample Characteristics

SMEs well represented

1 to 2030%

21 to 10020%

101 to 50022%

More than 50028%


Representative DomainsRepresentative Domains

2%

0%

2%

2%

1%

4%

31%

3%

1%

2%

7%

7%

7%

2%

3%

14%

3%

2%

3%

2%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Cooperation/coordinationCommunications

Customer informationDecision support

Distribution/logisticsEmbedded control

Engineering (CAD/CAM)Finance

Information provisionGraphics processing

Office automationOperating system

Personal/home softwareProcess control

ReservationResource management

SimulationSW development /CASETransaction processing

GIS


They are not NewcomersThey are not Newcomers

More than 5 years39%

1-2 years20%

3-4 years36%

Less than 1 year5%


RolesRoles

78%

62%59%59%

30%

24%

33%35%

29%

24%

14%

21%

7% 6% 8% 8%5%

16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Currently

In the next tw o years


Component ModelsComponent Models

65%

53%

34%

61%64%

56%

34%

45%

69%

0%

24%

49%

11%

33%

29%

15%

5%3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

DCOM, COM+ EJB, J2EE Webservicesbased on

SOAP/XML,WSDL

.net OMG CORBA;CCM

Other

CBD Strategies

Currently

In the next tw o years


Why and HowWhy and How

Business goals

What kind of project are using components?

Inhibitors


GoalsGoals

36%

19%

11% 11% 8% 7% 5% 3%

18%

18%

17%

3% 11%8% 12%

14%

15%

19%

11%

3%

18%

15%11%

8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Reduce IT Cost IT adaptability Benef it f romexternalproducts

Other Improvebusinessprocess

Leverageexisting IT

investments

Strategicbusiness

advancement

Businesspartner

compatibility

3rd Goal

2nd Goal

1st Goal


Which Projects are Using Components?Which Projects are Using Components?

32%

5%

29% 33%

2%

23%

45%

21% 11%

42%

18% 18%21%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

R&D Experimentation Pilot Projects Selected Key projects All projects Other

3rd

2nd

1st


Inhibitors to the Use of ComponentsInhibitors to the Use of Components

60%

49%

40%

34%

38%

43%

32%

36%

15%

19%

48%

28%

26%

24%

37%

28%

35%

29%

4%

33%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

No training in how to practice the use ofcomponents

Quality of components is questionable

Not enough components available

Lack of management support

Not willing to follow standard developmentprocesses or software product standard

“Not invented here” (NIH) syndrome

Cross departmental political barriers

No component library

Other

Lack of effective software metrics

CBD Strategies

CBSEnet Survey


Managerial and Technical PerspectivesManagerial and Technical Perspectives

Managerial35%

Technical65%


Inhibitors from Managerial and Technical Perspectives

Inhibitors from Managerial and Technical Perspectives

12%

7%

10%

3%

10%

17%

17%

14%

4%

4%

19%

12%

8%

6%

10%

9%

11%

9%

12%

4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

No training in how to practice the use of components

Not willing to follow standard developmentprocesses or software product standard

Cross departmental political barriers

Lack of effective software metrics

No component library

“Not invented here” (NIH) syndrome

Quality of components is questionable

Not enough components available

Lack of management support

Other Technical

Managerial


Components AccountingComponents Accounting49%

28%

13%10%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Accounting on the basisof component as a cost

Other Managament open toasset-based accounting

Components as an asset


Some Preliminary ConclusionsSome Preliminary Conclusions

Immature field but widely spread also among SMEs

Quality of components questionable (managerial perspective)

The use of components is not considered an investment

Lack of training (technical perspective)

Less development from scratch (development role)

Web services seem to experiment an increase in the future


For additional information For additional information

Pedro Gutierrez [email protected] Marisa Escalante [email protected]

Or check the following addresses:

www.cbsenet.org

www5.esi.es/cbse/ [on-line questionnaire]


COTS Challenges

Identification, classification and characterisationThe difficulties to find suitable COTS in the marketplace; to characterise

COTS so that enough information is collected to evaluate COTS; and to classify those COTS in a way that makes selection easier.

Processes and methodsThe need to have a defined process to manage and execute COTS-based

development projects. These projects involve a new manner of developing software systems, with different ways of working at business and technical level

Legal issuesthe contractual aspects of COTS acquisition. This includes aspects like:

which laws apply to COTS, which laws protect COTS users from problems related to COTS products and COTS vendors, how to manage the impact that the COTS contracts and licenses have on the system sales, system maintenance, etc.


COTS Challenges

Cost analysisThe evaluation of the economic feasibility of using a certain COTS against other

options (subcontracting, developing in-house). These aspects include how to estimate the cost of the system to be developed taking into account: COTS price, evaluation effort, adaptation and integration effort, training, upgrades and maintenance effort; how to estimate the cost of the changes once the system is running, etc.

Change managementManaging and controlling the different types of change that may happen in COTS-

based development projects: changes to requirements, changes in technology, COTS versions, cultural change caused by the new way of working and roles, etc.


COTS Recommendations

Challenge RecommendationIdentification, classification and characterisation

Additional support beyond vendors specific identification schemes

Processes and methods Research

There is, but without impacting results

Legal issues Regulation and early impact analysis

Cost analysis Research

Change management Diffusion of existing experience


Legacy Systems

Most of them started as a COTS COTS you are buying now will become legacy … what

are you going to do? How to integrate COTS with existing legacy systems?


Legacy Systems

Questions are asked relative to the difficulties to integrate COTS products into a legacy system because of the system structure imposes more sensible requirements.

This project reveals one of the most common problems faced by the COTS userduring the integration of COTS within a legacy system that is, the system incapacityto interact with other COTS products.

On the other hand, the answers to the question Do you think the introduction of theCOTS products can really extend the life of an application was more affirmatives andagreed that a legacy system can be life extended only if the legacy system is well-

definedand well-known.Like many other terms in computing, the meaning of term “legacy system” may varyconsiderably with the context. The classical use of the term often refers to a “lessthan adequate long-standing system that nevertheless continues to be used”.However, the term has also been used to generally refer to “existing systems”.

Usingthe former definition it is clear that existing systems are not necessarily legacy.


Legacy Systems


COTS and Legacy Systems

Diffusion of existing experience

Change management

ResearchCost analysis

Regulation and early impact analysis

Legal issues

Research


Processes and methods


Identification, classification and characterisation

RecommendationChallenge

Diffusion of existing experience

Change management

ResearchCost analysis

Regulation and early impact analysis

Legal issues

Research


Processes and methods


Identification, classification and characterisation

RecommendationChallenge

•Additional challenges you consider relevant

•Prioritisation of challengesAre all of them equally relevant?

•Recommendations. What are your recommendations for each challenge?

Legacy Systems. •COTS and legacy integration problems.•BIG COTS become legacy in the end.

preliminary results cbse state of practice and experience survey

Documents