Definition of Done from Academy to the Industry: An Exploratory Survey
 |
International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) |  |
| © 2018 by IJETT Journal | ||
| Volume-58 Number-2 |
||
| Year of Publication : 2018 | ||
| Authors : Ana Silva, Ednaldo Dilorenzo, Mirko Perkusich, Danilo Santos, Hyggo Almeida, Angelo Perkusich |
||
| DOI : 10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V58P214 |
Citation
Ana Silva, Ednaldo Dilorenzo, Mirko Perkusich, Danilo Santos, Hyggo Almeida, Angelo Perkusich "Definition of Done from Academy to the Industry: An Exploratory Survey", International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), V58(2),72-78 April 2018. ISSN:2231-5381. www.ijettjournal.org. published by seventh sense research group
Abstract
Definition of Done (DoD) assures a balance between short-term delivery of features and long-term product quality. The state of the art of this area was documented in a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), which found 8 papers. This study reports findings on the usage of DoD based on the SLR results, focusing on aspects such as which criteria are used and the process in which they are defined and assessed. A survey was carried out using on-line questionnaires answered by practitioners. Data was collected from agile practitioners from 16 countries and different team sizes, and the main findings are: 1) Quality management is the most popular type of criteria; (2) DoD are not defined following a standard; 3) Most projects use a single level DoD; 4) DoD is emergent during a project; 5) The criteria are visible; 6) Most projects assess DoD manually; 7) There are no empirical evidence of its effectiveness; (8) Most challenges are related to the risk of over effort and reaching agreement among stakeholders; and (9) a new criteria were reported, deploy. The main implication for research is a need for empirical studies exploring the its use. For the industry, the results can assist the definition of their own.
Reference
[1] D. S. Cruzes and T. Dybå. Research synthesis in software engineering: A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology, 53(5):440 – 455, 2011. Special Section on Best Papers from XP2010.
[2] L. Graf. Assessing internet questionnaires: The online pretest lab. Online social sciences, pages 49–68, 2002.
[3] J. Humble and D. Farley. Continuous Delivery: Reliable Software Releases through Build, Test, and Deployment Automation. 2010.
[4] M. Perkusich, A. Perkusich, and H. Almeida. Using survey and weighted functions to generate node probability tables for Bayesian networks. In Proceedings of BRICS-CCI 2013, 2013.
[5] A. Silva, T. Araújo, J. Nunes, M. Perkusich, E. Dilorenzo, H. Almeida, and A. Perkusich. A systematic review on the use of definition of done on agile software development projects. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE’17, pages 364–373, New York, NY, USA, 2017. ACM.
[6] J. Sutherland and K. Schwaber. The scrum guide. [Online]. Available: http://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v1/Scrum-Guide-US.pdf, 2013. Accessed: 2016-03-02.
[7] L. Williams. What agile teams think of agile principles. Commun. ACM, 55(4):71–76, Apr. 2012.
[8] C. Wohlin, P. Runeson, M. Ho¨st, M. C. Ohlsson, B. Regnell, and A. Wesslén. Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 2000.
[9] Y. Zhang. Using the internet for survey research: A case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(1):57–68, 2000.
Keywords
Survey, Definition of Done, Agile Software Development, Software Development.