Abstract: draft but in right logic flow
TOC: draft but as detailed as possible
Introduction: draft but in right logic flow
Literature review: draft Methodology: milestone 1
Experiments & Results: TBC
Though not assessed, feedback will be given!
10‐15 minutes for each, including Q&A
One to two slides for background
Focus on Research Methodology
5% of the final marks
To be followed all the time!
Throughout an organisation, people have different responsibilities and worktasks, hence, it is probable that different roles have different priorities when it comes to what should be improved within a company. This has been found in previous studies in marketing, but is this true for software improvement as well?
This paper evaluates how different roles in a software development organization view different issues in software process improvement and if such differences could be used in order to provide more tailor‐made process improvements within an organization and uses this as a working hypothesis
A quantitative questionnaire containing five different weighted questions related to software process improvement was developed. 84 employees from all levels of a Swedish telecommunication company were then approached, of which 63 responded.
The different roles disagreed in three of the questions while they agreed in two of the questions. The disagreement was related to issues about importance of improvement, urgency of problems, and threat against successful process management, while the questions where the roles agreed focused on communication of the processes (documentation and teaching).
It is concluded that it is important to be aware and take into account the different needs of different roles. This will make it possible to provide improvements tailored to specific roles which will probably help to overcome resistance to process improvements. It is also important to look into other areas and companies (for example, marketing) where it could be beneficial when conducting process improvements.
Several sentences for each item
One to two paragraphs for each item
Brief introduction of results
List your contributions!
Introduction: context, objective
Literature review: context, objective
Experiments & Results: results
Follow the logic!
Focus on your contributions!
It is your work!
Easy to understand
Anyone can repeat your study to get similar results
Research is endless
Proposal of a new technique?
– You must state clearly its rationale and justify it!
RQs: to clearly show your technique is working
Objects: to apply your technique
Metrics: measurement to help answer each RQ
Baseline techniques: for scientific comparison & analysis
Experimental setup: how to conduct the experiments
– You must state clearly why we need this app!
Requirement: what the system should do
Non‐functional attributes, if any
Design: how it does this
– You must state clearly its unique contributions!
RQs: what you want to know from the data
Sources: where you get the data
Keywords/filtering: which data you obtain
Metrics: how you measure the data
Holding a PhD degree in Finance, Dr. John Adams is experienced in assisting students who are in dire need...
55 - Completed Orders
Canada, Toronto I have acquired my degree from Campion College at the University of Regina Occuption/Desi...
52 - Completed Orders
Even since I was a student in Italy I had a passion for languages, in fact I love teaching Italian, and I...
102 - Completed Orders
To work with an organization where I can optimally utilize my knowledge and skills for meeting challenges...
109 - Completed Orders
JOB OBJECTIVE Seeking entry level assignments in Marketing & Business Development with an organization...
202 - Completed Orders
Current work profile Project manager- The Researchers Hub (2nd Jan 2016 to presently working) Researc...
20 - Completed Orders
Sales Assistant, Mito Marina Assigned to the Stationery dept – assisted in merchandising, stock taking...
100 - Completed Orders